Full text of "Ancient history : from the earliest times to the fall of the Western empire : comprising the history of Chaldæa, Assyria, Media, Babylonia, Lydia, Phnicia, Syria, Judæa, Egypt, Carthage, Persia, Greece, Macedonia, Parthia, and Rome"

See other formats

presented to the
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA
SAN DIEGO

the Estate of
Mrs. Anne Fisher

^'WVMsiTYOF

Social Sciences & Humanities Library

University of California, San Diego
Please Note: This item is subject to recall.

Date Due

MAY 3 1 200e

CI 39 (5/97)

UCSD Lib.

Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2007 with funding from

IVIicrosoft Corporation

http://www.archive.org/details/ancienthistoryfrOOrawliala

3 1822 02468 7444

y i'^i.vt i^g,^^iisaig^iyLa^c^f^^p^ii£jti^^^*vi\i4^^

THE WORLDS
GREAT CLASSICS

Timothy Dwight. D.D. LLD.
Richard Henry5toddard
Arthvr Richmond Marsh. AB.
Pavlvan Dyke.D.D.
Albert Ellery Bergh

I LLV5TRATED • WITH • NE ARLYTVJO-

■HVNDRED PHOTOCRAVVBE5 • ETCH= )^t^

INCS COLORED-PLATES AND- FVLL- p,.f

pace portraits of great- avthors ^?
Clarence Cook Art Editor

y^w^p^^ lit ^11 1.H n tt. Jxi.^n-jKa. -ti k -n t% ^**^

TH E COLONIAL PRE5S -

NEW-YORK ^ MDCCCXCIX •

[t^(^(e7(^(€WcTf0m^^r^ira^f£jrif^^

igl

-•^m-r'^ rt

m #

GEORGE RAWLfiYSON, M.A., RR.GS.

{Canon of Canterbury and Camden Professor of Ancient
Ilis'tory at the University of Oxford.)

FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TO THE
FALL OF THE WESTERN EMPIRE

COMPRISING THE HISTORY OF
CHALDitA, ASSYRIA, MEDIA, BABYLONIA, LYDIA,
PHaNICIA, SYRIA, JUDi€A, EGYPT, CARTHAGE, fl
PERSIA. GREECE, MACEDONIA, PARTHIA, AND ROME

GE0RGE(RAWLIN§i21i^.M-A>, F.R.G.S.

CAMDEN PROFESSOR OF AKCIESt HISTORY AT UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD

REVISED EDITION

WITH A SPECIAL INTRODUCTION BY
WILLIAM F. MCDOWELL, S.T.D., PH.D.
CHANCEUOR OF THE UNIVERSITY OF DENVER

'ixi'mnu-i(>)i^n,

in E

FIFTH AVKJ^^L^^'ALfe-NtWYORK^

THE WORLDS GREAT CLASSICS

INTRODUCTION TO THE SERIES.

IN annotating the Biblical text, concerning the " making of
many books," a fourteenth century commentator declared
most positively that the only books which might be read
without harmful results are " the bokis of hooli scripture " and
" other bokis that ben needful to the understanding of hooli
scripture."

Solomon and our mediaeval sage would scarcely have cause
to reverse their opinion if they had to pass judgment on the bulk
of modem publications. To-day superficiality and sensation
reign supreme, and the classics of literature are barely circu-
lated. The classics are largely relegated to the shelves of
public libraries, which are obviously only accessible to a small
proportion of readers.

There has been an effort, of late, to supply the reading public
with various encyclopaedias of literature, which, so far as the
literary selections are concerned, bring to mind the grumbler's
comment on his dinner, " It's all very well as far as it goes, and
there's a good deal of it, too, such as it is." These encyclo-
paedias are in the nature of anthologies, and, while they may
be very useful as literary scrap-books, they fail to satisfy those
who wish to possess the classics in their entirety.

The projectors of the present series of books have made it
possible for readers to possess a carefully selected library of
the world's great classics. The publishers of this series have
no desire to pose as educational philanthropists. They claim,
however, that the publication of these classics will certainly tend
to increase the reading of the best books of all time, Carlyle
said that a collection of books is a real university. In that
sense the present collection ought to prove invaluable to those

IV THE WORLD'S GREAT CLASSICS

who wish to enjoy the perusal of books referred to by Lowell
as the supreme books in literature.

The art of printing has revolutionized the world. The print-
ing-press has proved far more potent than any other civilizing
influence. Learning is no longer confined to the few. The
literature of civilization is free to all. " He that runs may
read." The danger lies in reading everything we run across.
Indiscriminate reading is seldom beneficial.

While the printing-press has proved a potent power for good,
it has also been used for ignominious purposes. In many
quarters the first consideration in accepting an author's manu-
script to-day is not whether it be a book that is worthy of pub-
lication, but whether it be a book that is sufficiently sensational
to make it sell. There exists, however, a large and growing
class of readers who are not satisfied with these superficial
books of the hour. They crave for something more substan-
tial than the sensational reading-matter offered them in " up-to-
date " novels, decadent newspapers, and catch-penny maga-
zines. The times are ripe for a revival of the fittest. On the
intellectual horizon of the twentieth century breaks the dawn
of a literary renaissance. The workers of the world long for
"more light." They desire to have the gates of knowledge
thrown wide open, recognizing instinctively that " knowledge
is power," and that those who toil will ever be governed by
those who think.

In the early days of printing, the books to which the people
had access were few and far between. To-day the world is
flooded with books, good, bad, and indifferent. The question
is no longer how can I obtain a printed book, but how am I to
know what printed book to read? This is a most important
question for those whose leisure for reading is limited. " The
world," says Frederick Harrison, in his scholarly essay on the
choice of books, " has long ago closed the great assize of letters
and judged the first places everywhere. In such a matter the
judgment of the world, guided and informed by a long succes-
sion of accomplished critics, is almost unerring. There may
be doubts about the third and the fourth rank, but the first and
second are hardly open to discussion."

INTRODUCTION TO THE SERIES v

The books of the present library all come under the head of
classics — books conforming to the best authority in literature
—books of acknowledged excellence. Read them ! There is
nothing except human love from which you can derive greater
happiness than the love of reading. Books prove companions
in sorrow and solitude. They assuage the pangs of physical
pain. They enable you to commune with all the master minds
of by-gone ages. The light of intellect flashes across the
printed page. The recorded thoughts of literature live on for-
ever. Books are the " legacies of genius." We are all heirs
to the magic realm of fancy, the republic of letters, the glorious
domain of immortal thought. The pyramids of Nubia and
Egypt, the palaces and sculptured slabs of Nineveh, the Cy-
clopean walls of Italy and Greece, the temples of India — none
have escaped the ravages of Time. The beautiful statues of an-
tiquity— the Venus of Melos, the sculptures of the Parthenon —
will sooner or later vanish from the face of earth. But the
poetry of Homer, Dante, and Shakespeare, the philosophy of
Plato and Aristotle, the wisdom of Solomon and Socrates, the
eloquence of Demosthenes and Cicero will last as long as Earth
itself. The material creations of art crumble to dust. Soul-
stirring thoughts, the creations of intellect, alone survive.

" To be without books," exclaims Ruskin, " is the abyss of
penury ; don't endure it." Books that we own after awhile
become actual companions. " He that loveth a book," says
Isaac Barrow, *' will never want a faithful friend, a wholesome
counsellor, a cheerful companion or effectual comforter. By
study, by reading, by thinking, one may innocently divert and
pleasantly entertain himself as in all weathers, so in all fortune."
The books of the present series cover a wide field. The first
ten volumes contain " histories " that have been crowned as
classics by the consensus of critical opinion. The authors of
these historical volumes are Rawlinson, Hallam, Michelet,
Green. Guizot, Carlyle, and Creasy. The subjects treated in
the succeeding ten volumes are Philosophy, Political Economy,
Science, Government, and Law. The third section is devoted
mainly to Classic Essays and Classic Orations, while the last
ten volumes comprise English Literature, Oriental Literature,

vi THE WORLD'S GREAT CLASSICS

Classic Drama, Poetry, and Ethics. The authors selected in-
clude only the master minds of ancient and modern times.

The art features comprise photogravures from famous paint-
ings and classic sculpture, portraits of authors, fac-simile illu-
minations of mediaeval books and manuscripts, choice examples
of early printing and engraving, and various other illustrations.

On the Library Committee are such competent judges of
good books as Dr. Timothy Dwight, ex-President of Yale Uni-
versity ; Richard Henry Stoddard, poet and literary critic ; Dr.
Paul van Dyke, of Princeton, and Prof. Arthur Richmond
Marsh, of Harvard. Each of the classics selected has a special
introduction by a writer fully qualified to give a critical analysis
of the work in question. Every available device in the art of
book-making has been brought into service to make these vol-
umes attractive, and the type, paper, and binding are of excel-
lent quality.

The present library is in the nature of a " University Exten-
sion," for it aims to provide a fuller and broader intellectual life
rather than any technical perfection. The trend of the times is
toward mental culture. In the " World's Great Classics " the
intellectual pleasures and luxuries of life are made accessible
to every home where the love of reading prevails. The pub-
lishers have provided a feast with the " Immortals." The flow
of soul comes from the authors of all ages. Let the toast be
what Alfonso, King of Aragon, was wont to say were the four
best things of life : " Old wood to burn ! Old wine to drink !
Old friends to converse with ! Old books to read ! " Sic itur
ad astra.

^^^^^/^5^s^ A^i^^

Managing Editor.

TfAfOTHY VWlGJiT, I\1K. LL.D.
(PrtsiMnt of Yaie Univrrsity.)
I ■■: J pbotogra/A by Pofb

SPECIAL INTRODUCTION

THE author of this volume is one of the many notable ex-
amples of scholarship in the English clergy. He is best
known as Canon Rawlinson. One of his most widely
read papers was his " Present Day Tract " on the " Early
Prevalence of Monotheistic Belief." He supplied the com-
ments on numerous books of the Old Testament to " The
Speaker's Commentary " and the excellence of his work made
him a favorite with many students.

George Rawlinson was born in 1815 in Oxfordshire, Eng-
land, being five years younger than his brother, Sir Henry Cres-
wicke Rawlinson, D.C.L., the Orientalist and diplomat. Both
were educated at Ealing School, the former graduating from
Oxford with classical honors in 1838. He became a fellow of
Exeter College in 1840, Bampton Lecturer in 1859, Camden
Professor of Ancient History at Oxford in 1861, holding that
office until 1889, when he resigned. In 1872 he was appointed
Canon of Canterbury Cathedral. The mere titles of his books
indicate what a prodigious worker he has been. His industry
is amazing and his achievements surprising even for a life un-
usually long. In addition to his manual of " Ancient History/'
he has written the following historical works : " The Five Great
Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern World," " The Sixth Great
Oriental Monarchy, or the Geography, History, and Antiquities
of Parthia," " The Seventh Great Oriental Monarchy, or the
Geography, History and Antiquities of the Sassanian or New
Persian Empire," " History of Ancient Egypt," " Religions of
the Ancient World," " Eg\pt and Babylon," a history of
" Phoenicia," and in connection with his brother and Sir Gard-
ner Wilkinson, a translation of Herodotus with extensive notes
and illustrations. His Bampton lectures in 1859 ^^re upon

viii RAWLINSON

"The Historical Evidence of the Truth of the Scripture
Records." In addition to all this Canon Rawlinson has written
much in the shape of special articles for such works as Smith's
" Bible Dictionary " and the magazines. He wrote the article
on Herodotus in the ninth edition of the " Encyclopaedia Britan-
nica," and in 1893 he wrote the volume on " Parthia " in " The
Story of the Nations " series. He held the office of Classical
Examiner under the Council of Military Education from 1859 —
1870, and has been Proctor in Convocation for the Dean and
Chapter of Canterbury since 1873.

His manual of " Ancient History " is professedly intended to
take the place of Heeren's " Handbuch." Readers of Herodotus
are charmed by that garrulous and entertaining old story-teller,
" the father of history." But Herodotus did not err on the
critical side. He was interested in everything he heard. He
was not a scientific annalist coldly sifting evidence, though he
was not blindly credulous. Nevertheless he admitted many
things, wisely so, on rather slender evidence. Harrison says
that the reader of Herodotus needs such a manual as Heeren's,
and Rawlinson's manual, on the same plan, now takes its place
It covers the same ground and in much the same fashion. Raw-
linson writing later, has, of course, corrected many statements,
revised many judgments, and has carefully embodied the dis-
coveries and researches of the present century. This adds the
labor of at least three most active and fruitful generations to
Heeren's g^eat work. Rawlinson's manual is not intended to be
a popular treatise for light reading. Its preparation was not the
idle pastime of an idle day. Its author was a student, patiently
investigating details, and bringing a perfect mass of them before
the reader.

This manual is most valuable for the general reader and the
right kind of students. Its bibliography alone would make it
a gjeat work. There is probably no better list of authorities on
the period and nations covered. And one can forgive the text
for lacking the rhetorical embellishments which characterize
certain histories in view of Canon Rawlinson's painstaking facts
presented in such abundance. At a time when history is tend-

SPECIAL INTRODUCTION. ix

ing to become scientific in the larger sense, our debt to the fact-
gatherer is immense. Philosophy, Literature, and Art are all
dependent upon him. And at a time when men's interest in
ancient history is experiencing a revival like the quickened de-
votion to child study, the republication of this manual appears
most timely. Ancient History is a vital part of Modem History.
" The past is only the present in a less developed form." Divi-
sions between Ancient and Modern History are purely arbitrary.
Ancient History occurred in a part of the world far distant
from us. For long ages it continued distant, but the modem
Westem nations have a keen and vital interest in the far Eastern
world to-day. Asia and Africa, subjects of Book I. in this
manual, never were so close to England and America as at pres-
ent. The distant in space has been brought near. The ancient
is made recent by such studies as this. Dr. Charles Kendall
Adams, President of the University of Wisconsin, and a noted
historical critic, says in his manual of " Historical Literature **
that " as a guide to a student in the thorough study of Ancient
History, Rawlinson's manual has no equal in our language."

William F. McDowell.

RAWLINSON'S PREFACE

THE work here given to the public has been contem-
plated by the author for several years. The " Hand-
biich " of Professor Heeren, originally published
in 1799, and corrected by its writer up to the year 1828,
is, so far as he knows, the only modem work of reputa-
tion treating in a compendious form the subject of An-
cient History generally. Partial works, i.e., works embracing
portions of the field, have been put forth more recently, as,
particularly, the important " Manuel " of M. Lenormant
(Manuel d'histoire ancienne de V Orient jusqu'aux guerres Me-
diqiies. Paris, 1868 — 69 ; 3 vols. i2mo.) But no work with the
scope and on the scale of Professor Heeren's has, so far as the
present writer is aware, made its appearance since 1828. That
work itself, in its English dress, is, he believes, out of print;
and it is one, so great a portion of which has become antiquated
by the progress of historical criticism and discovery, that it can
not now be recommended to the student, unless with large re-
serves and numerous cautions. Under these circumstances, it
seemed to the present writer desirable to replace the " Hand-
buch " of Heeren by a manual conceived on the same scale, ex-
tending over the same period, and treating (in the main) of the
same nations.

Heeren's Hand-book always appeared to him admirable in
design, and, considering the period at which it was written, ex-
cellent in execution. He has been content to adopt, generally,
its scheme and divisions; merely seeking in every case to bring
the history up to the level of our present advanced knowledge,
and to embody in his work all the really ascertained results of
modem research and discovery. He has not suffered himself
to be tempted by the example of M. Lenormant to include in the

xii RAWLINSON

manual an account of the Arabians or the Indians ; since he has
not been able to convince himself that either the native tradi-
tions of the former, as reported by Abulfeda, Ibn-Khaldoun,
and others, or the epic poems of the latter (the Maha Bharata
and Ramayana), are trustworthy sources of history. With
more hesitation he has decided on not including in his present
work the history of the Sassanidae, which is sufficiently authen-
tic, and which in part runs parallel with a period that the manual
embraces. But, on the whole, it appeared to him that the Sas-
sanidae belonged as much to Modern as to Ancient History —
to the Byzantine as to the Roman period. And, in a doubtful
case, the demands of brevity, which he felt to be imperative in
such a work as a manual, seemed entitled to turn the scale.

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION.

History. — History Proper, its divisions. — Ancient History, how best
distinguished from Modern. — Sources of History: i. Antiquities;
2. Written Records, including (a) Inscriptions, (b) Books. — Im-
portance of Inscriptions. — Coins. — Books, ancient and modern. —
Cognate sciences to History: i. Chronology; 2. Geography. —
Chief eras. — Chronological Monuments. — Works on Chronologfy.
— Works on Geography. — Modes of dividing Ancient History. —
Scheme of the Work

BOOK I.

History of the Ancient Asiatic and African States and Kingdoms
from the Earliest Times to the Foundation of the Persian Monar-
chy by Cyrus the Great IS

PART I.— Asiatic Nations.

Preliminary Remarks on the Geography of Asia IS

Preliminary Observations on the General Character of the Early

Asiatic Kingdoms 25

History of the Ancient Asiatic Kingdoms previous to Cyrus 28

I. Chaldaean Monarchy 28

II. Assyrian Monarchy 30

III. Median Monarchy 32

IV. Babylonian Monarchy 34

V. Kingdoms in Asia Minor: i. Phrygia; 2. Cilicia; 3. Lydia. 35

VI. Phoenicia 37

VI I. Syria 41

VIH. Judxa 41

a. From the Exodus to the Establishment of the Mon-

archy 42

b. From the Establishment of the Monarchy to the Separa-

tion into two Kingdoms 43

e. From the Separation of the Kingdoms to the Captivity

under Nebuchadnezzar 46

xiii

xiv RAWLINSON

PART II. — African Nations. p^^.^

Preliminary Remarks on the Geography of Ancient Africa 49

Historical Sketch of the Ancient African States 51

I- Egypt 54

XL Carthage 65

a. From the Foundation of the City to the Commencement

of the Wars with Syracuse 65

b. From the Commencement of the Wars with Syracuse

to the Breaking-out of the First War with Rome 71

BOOK II.

History of Persia from the Accession of Cyrus to the Destruction of
the Empire by Alexander the Great 77

BOOK III.

History of the Grecian States from the Earliest Times to the Acces-
sion of Alexander the Great 97

Geographical Outline of Greece 97

FIRST PERIOD.

The Ancient Traditional History, from the Earliest Times to the
Dorian Occupation of the Peloponnese 109

SECOND PERIOD.
History of Greece from the Dorian Conquest of the Peloponnese to

the Commencement of the Wars with Persia 114

Part I. History of the principal Hellenic States in Greece Proper. . 114

I. Sparta 117

II. Athens 120

Part XL History of the other Grecian States 123

X. In the Peloponnese:

o. Achaea 123

b. Arcadia * 124

c. Corinth 125

d. Elis 126

e. Sicyon 126

II. In Central Greece:

a. Megaris 127

b. Boeotia 128

c. Phocis 129

d. Locris 130

e. ^tolia 130

f. Acarnania 130

CONTENTS XV

III. In Northern Greece: pact

a. Thessaly 131

b. Epirus 133

IV. In the Islands: •

a. Corcyra 133

b. Cephallenia 133

c. Zacynthus 133

d. iCgina 133

e. EubcEa '. 134

f. The Cyclades 134

g. Lemnos 134

A. Thasos 135

i. Crete 135

;. Cyprus 137

V. Greek Colonies 138

THIRD PERIOD.
History of Greece from the Commencement of the Wars with
Persia to the Battle of Chaeroneia 140

BOOK IV.

History of the Macedonian Monarchy 163

Geographical Outline of Macedonia 163

Historical Sketch of the Monarchy:

FIRST PERIOD.
From the Commencement of the Monarchy to the Death of Alexan-
der the Great 164

SECOND PERIOD.
From the Death of Alexander the Great to the Battle of Ipsus 176

THIRD PERIOD,
History of the States into which the Macedonian Monarchy was

broken up after the Battle of Ipsus 183

Part I. History of the Syrian Kingdom of the Seleucidae 183

Part II. History of the Egyptian Kingdom of the Ptolemies 194

Part III. History of Macedonia, and of Greece, from the Death of

Alexander to the Roman Conquest 210

Part IV. History of the Smaller States and Kingdoms formed out

of the Fragments of Alexander's Monarchy 229

I. Kingdom of Pergamus 230

II. Kingdom of Bithynia 234

III. Kingdom of Paphlagonia 238

IV. Kingdom of Pontus 239

V. Kingdom of Cappadocia 245

xvi RAWLINSON

PAGE

VI. Kingdom of Greater Armenia « 249

VII. Kingdom of Armenia Minor 251

VIII. Kingdom of Bactria 252

IX. Kingdom of Parthia 254

X. Kingdom of Judaea 255

a. From the Captivity to the Fall of the Persian Em-

pire 255

b. From the Fall of the Persian Empire to the Re-

establishment of an Independent Kingdom 258

c. From the Re-establishment of an Independent King-

dom to the Full Establishment of the Power of
Rome 260

d. From the Full Establishment of Roman Power to

the Destruction of Jerusalem by Titus 261

BOOK V.
PART I. — History of Rome.

Preliminary Remarks on the Geography of Ancient Italy 267

Sketch of the History of Rome:-

FIRST PERIOD.
The Ancient Traditional History from the Earliest Times to the
Commencement of the Republic 281

SECOND PERIOD.
From the Foundation of the Republic to the Commencement of
the Samnite Wars 296

THIRD PERIOD.
From the Breaking out of the First Samnite War to the Commence-
ment of the Wars with Carthage 317

FOURTH PERIOD.
From the Commencement of the First War wtth Carthage to the
Rise of the Civil Broils under the Gracchi 327

FIFTH PERIOD.
From the Commencement of Internal Troubles under the Gracchi
to the Establishment of the Empire under Augustus 351

SIXTH PERIOD.
From the Establishment of the Empire under Augustus to the

Destruction of the Roman Power in the West by Odoacer 384

Preliminary Remarks on the Geographical Extent and Principal

Divisions of the Roman Empire 384

CONTENTS xvii

Historical Sketch of the Roman Empire: page

First Section. From the Battle of Actium to the Death of Com-
modus 397

Second Section. From the Death of Commodus to the Acces-
sion of Diocletian 427

Third Section. From the Accession of Diocletian to the Final
Division of the Empire 442

Fourth Section. History of the Western Empire from the Ac-
cession of Honorius, a.d. 395, to the Deposition of Romulus Au-
gustus, A.D. 476 462

PART n.— History of Parthia.

Geographical Outline of the Parthian Empire 472

Sketch of the History of Parthia:

FIRST PERIOD.
From the Foundation of the Kingdom by Arsaces to the Estab-
lishment of the Empire by Mithridates 1 476

SECOND PERIOD.
From the Establishment of the Empire by Mithridates I. to the
Commencement of the Wars with Rome 479

THIRD PERIOD.
From the Commencement of the Wars with Rome to the De-
struction of the Empire by Artaxerxes 484

ttisou

CHOICE EXAMPLES OF BOOK ILLUMINATION.

Fac-similes from Illuminated Manuscripts and Illustrated Books
of Early Date.

MINIATURE OF THE ANNUNCIATION.
From tbe Cottdi Litre d'Hetires, written in France about 1490.

This plate is an excellent specimen of French work. The chief miniature is an
Annunciation, which seems to be taking place in a private oratory, while the
borders look like sections of a Gothic church, with niches and fretwork, and the
columns which yield compartments for smaller miniatures.

ILLUSTRATIONS

George Rawlinson, Canon of Canterbury

Photogravure from a photograph

Timothy Dwight, D.D., LL.D. (Portrait) .
Photogravure from a photograph

Miniature of the Annunciation

Fac-simile lUamination from the Conde Livre d'Heores

Helen of Troy

Photogravure from a painting

Mental Education of a Greek Youth .

Photogravure from a painting

TuLLiA Driving Over Her Father's Corpse

Photogravure from a painting

FACING PAGB

Ftvmtisfitct

XVUl

210

366

ANCIENT HISTORY

INTRODUCTION

The word " History," which etymologically means " in-
quiry " or " research," and which has many sUghtly differing
uses, is attached in modem parlance pre-eminently and espe-
cially to accounts of the rise, progress, and affairs of Nations.
The consideration of man, prior to the formation of political
communities and apart from them, belongs to Natural History
— and especially to that branch of it which is called Anthro-
pologn^' — but not to History Proper. History Proper is the his-
tory of States or Nations, both in respect to their internal af-
fairs and in regard to their dealings one with another. Under
the former head, one of the most important branches is Consti-
tutional History, or the history of Governments; under the
latter are included not only accounts of the wars, but likewise
of the friendly relations of the different States, and of their com-
mercial or other intercourse.

Anthropology, though not History Proper, is akin to it, and is a
science of which the historical student should not be ignorant It treats
of man prior to the time when history takes him up, and thus forms,
in some sort, the basis on which history rests. The original condition
of man, his primary habitat or place of abode, the mode and time of
his dispersion; the questions of the formation of races, of their differ-
ences, and of their affinities: these, and similar subjects, which belong
properly to anthropology, are of interest to the historian, and underlie
his proper field. The most important works bearing on these matters
are:

" The Book of Genesis " — ^the only extant work which claims to give

an authoritative account of the creation and dispersion of mankind, and

which is universally admitted to contain most interesting notices of the

primitive condition of the human race, and of important facts belonging

a RAWLINSON

to very remote times. Kalisch's " Historical and Critical Commen-
tary," London, Longman, 1855, contains a mass of valuable, though
not always quite sober, illustration from the best modern sources.

" The Physical History of Mankind," by Dr. Prichard, London, 3d
edition, 1836 — a work of great grasp and power, elaborately illustrated,
and in many respects of enduring value; but in some points behind
the existing state of our knowledge. Not, however, at present super-
seded by any general work.

" Prehistoric Man," by Sir John Lubbock. London, 1866. This
book is based mainly on recent researches into the earliest vestiges
of man upon the earth, as those believed to have been found under-
neath the floors of caves, in ancient gravel deposits, in the soil at the
bottom of lakes, in the so-called " kitchen-middings," and the like.
It is well illustrated.

History Proper is usually divided either into two or into
three portions. If the triple division is adopted, the portions
are called, respectively, " Ancient History," the " History of
the Middle Ages," and " Modern History." If the twofold
division is preferred, the middle portion is suppressed, and His-
tory is regarded as falling under the two heads of " Ancient "
and " Modern."

" Ancient " History is improperly separated from " Modern "
by the arbitrary assumption of a particular date. A truer,
better, and more convenient division may be made by regard-
ing as ancient all that belongs to a state of things which has
completely passed away, and as modern all that connects itself
inseparably with the present. In Western Europe the irrup-
tion of the Northern Barbarians, in Eastern Europe, in Asia,
and in Africa, the Mohammedan conquests form the line of
demarcation between the two portions of the historic field;
since these events brought to a close the old condition of things
and introduced the condition which continues to the present
day.

The Sources of History fall under the two heads of written
records, and antiquities, or the actual extant remains of ancient
times, whether buildings, excavations, sculptures, pictures,
vases, or other productions of art. These antiquities exist either
in the countries anciently inhabited by the several nations,
where they may be seen in situ; or in museums, to which they
have been removed by the modems, partly for their better
preservation, partly for the purposes of general study and com-

ANCIENT HISTORY 3

parison; or, finally, in private collections, where they are for
the most part inaccessible, and subserve the vanity of the
collectors.

No general attempt has ever been made to collect into one work
a description or representation of all these various remains; and, in-
deed, their multiplicity is so great that such a collection is barely con-
ceivable. Works, however, on limited portions of the great field of
"Antiquities" are numerous; and frequent mention will have to be
made of them in speaking of the sources for the history of different
states and periods. Here those only will be noticed which have some-
thing of a general character.

Oberlin, " Orbis antiqui monumentis suis illustrati primae linea:."
Argentorati, 1790. Extremely defective, but remarkable, considering
the time at which it was written.

Caylus, ** Recueil d'Antiquites Egyptiennes, Etrusques, Grecques et
Romaines." Paris, 1752-67. Full of interest, but with engravings of
a very rude and primitive character.

Montfaucon, " L'Antiquite expliquee et representee en figures."
Paris, 1719-24; IS vols., folio.

Smith, Dr. W., " Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities."
London, 2d edition, 1853.

Fergusson, James, " History of Architecture in all Countries, from
the Earliest Times to the Present Day." London, 1865-67.

Birch, Samuel, " Ancient Pottery." London, 1858.

The second source of Ancient History, written records, is
at once more copious and more important than the other. It
consists of two main classes of documents — (i) Inscriptions on
public monuments, generally contemporary with the events re-
corded in them; and (2) Books, the works of ancient or modem
writers on the subject.

Whether Inscriptions were, or were not, the most ancient
kind of written memorial is a point that can never be deter-
mined. What is certain is, that the nations of antiquity made
use to a very large extent of this mode of commemorating
events. In Egypt, in Assyria, in Babylonia, in Armenia, in
Persia, in Phoenicia, in Lycia, in Greece, in Italy, historical
events of importance were from time to time recorded in this
way — sometimes on the natural rock, which was commonly
smoothed for the purpose; sometimes on obelisks or pillars;
frequently upon the walls of temples, palaces, and tombs; oc-
casionally upon metal plates, or upon tablets and cylinders of
fine clay — hard and durable materials all of them, capable of

4 RAWLINSON

lasting hundreds or even thousands of years, and in many cases
continuing to the present day. The practice prevailed, as it
seems, most widely in Assyria and in Egypt; it was also in
considerable favor in Persia and among the Greeks and Ro-
mans. The other nations used it more sparingly. It was said
about half a century ago that " of the great mass of inscriptions
still extant, but few comparatively are of any importance as
regards history." But this statement, if true when it was made,
which may be doubted, at any rate requires modification now.
The histories of Egypt and Assyria have been in a great meas-
ure reconstructed from the inscriptions of the two countries.
The great inscription of Behistun has thrown much light upon
the early history of Persia. That on the Delphic tripod has
illustrated the most glorious period of Greece. It is now gen-
erally felt that inscriptions are among the most important of
ancient records, and that their intrinsic value makes up to a
great extent for their comparative scantiness.

General collections of ancient inscriptions do not as yet exist. But
the following, which have more or less of a general character, may
be here mentioned:

Muratori, Lud. Ant., " Novus Thesaurus Veterum Inscriptionum."
Mediolani, 1739, etc. Together with Donati, " Supplementa."
Luccae, 1764.

Gruter, " Inscriptiones antiquse totius orbis Romani," cura J. G.
Graevii. Amstel. 1707; 4 vols., folio.

Pococke, R., " Inscriptionum antiquarum Graecarum et Latinarum
liber." Londini, 1752; folio.

Chandler, R., " Inscriptiones antiquae pleraeque nondum editae." Ox-
onii, 1774; folio.

Osann, Fr., " Sylloge Inscriptionum antiquarum Graecarum et Lat-
inarum." Lipsiae, 1834; folio.

A large number of cuneiform inscriptions, Assyrian, Babylonian,
and Persian, will be found in the " Expedition Scientifique en Meso-
potamie " of M. Jules Oppert. Paris, 1858. The Persian, Babylonian,
and Scythian or Turanian transcripts of the great Behistun Inscription
are contained in the " Journal of the Asiatic Society," vols, x., xiv., and
XV., to which they were contributed by Sir H. Rawlinson and Mr.
Norris. A small but valuable collection of inscriptions, chiefly cunei-
form, is appended to Mr. Rich's " Narrative of a Journey from Bussora
to Persepolis." London, 1839.

Under the head of Inscribed Monuments must be included
Coins, which have in most instances a legend, or legends, and

ANCIENT HISTORY 5

which often throw considerable light upon obscure points of
history. The importance of coins is no doubt the greatest in
those portions of ancient history where the information de-
rivable from authors — especially from contemporary authors —
is the scantiest; their use, however, is not limited to such por-
tions, but extends over as much of the historical field as admits
of numismatic illustration.

Collections of ancient coins exist in most museums and in many
libraries. The collection of the British Museum is among the best in
the worid. The Bodleian Library has a good collection; and there
is one in the library of Christ Church, Oxford, possessing many points
of interest. In default of access to a good collection, or in further
prosecution of numismatic study, the learner may consult the following
comprehensive works:

Spanheim, " Dissertatio de usu et praestantia Numismatum." Lon-
don and Amsterdam, 1706-17; 2 vols., folio.

Eckhel, " De Doctrina Nummorum Veterum." Vindebonae, 1792-98;
8 vols., 4to.

Mionnet, " Description des Medailles." Paris, 1806-37; 16 vols.,
8vo, copiously illustrated.

Humphreys, " Ancient Coins and Medals." London, 1850. In this
work, by means of embossed plates, fac-similes of the obverse and re-
verse of many coins are produced.

Leake, " Numismata Hellenica." London, 1854.

Works upon coins, embracing comparatively narrow fields, are nu-
merous, and often specially valuable. Many such works will be no-
ticed among the sources for the history of particular times and nations.

The " Books " from which ancient history may be learned
are of two kinds — Ancient and Modem. Ancient works
which treat the subject in a general way are neither numerous
nor (with one exception) very valuable. The chief of those
now extant are:

Diodorus Siculus, " Bibliotheca Historica," in forty books, of which
only books i.-v. inch and xi.-xx. incl. have come down to us entire.
The best editions are those of Wesseling (Bipont. 1793-1800; 10 vols.,
8vo) and Dindorf (Parisiis, 1843-44; 2 vols., 8vo). This work was a
universal history from the earliest times down to B.C. 60.

Polybius, " Historiae," likewise in forty books, of which the first five
only are complete. Originally, a universal history of the period com-
mencing B.C. 220 and terminating B.C. 146. Bad in style, but excellent
in criticism and accuracy. The best edition is Schweighaeuser's (Lips.

6 RAWLINSON

1789 et seqq.; 8 vols., 8vo. Reprinted at Oxford, 1823, together with
the same scholar's " Lexicon Polybianum," in 5 vols., 8vo). A good
edition of the mere text has been published by Didot, Paris, 1859.

Justinus, " Historiae Philippicas," in forty-four books, extracted, or
rather abbreviated, from Trogus Pompeius, a writer of the Augustan
age. This is a. universal history from the earliest times to Augustus
Caesar. It is a short work, and consequently very slight and sketchy.
Of recent editions, the best is that of Duebner (Lips. 1831). The best
of the old editions is that of Strasburg, 1802, 8vo.

Zonaras, " Chronicon sive Annales," in twelve books. A universal
history, extending from the Creation to the death of the Emperor
Maximin, a.d. 238. Greatly wanting in criticism. The best edition is
that in the " Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinse." Bonnae,
1841-44.

Besides these, there remain fragments from the universal history of
Nicolaus Damascenus (" Fragm. Hist. Graec," Vol. IIL, ed. C. Miiller,
Parisiis, 1849), which are of very considerable value.

Modern works embracing the whole range of ancient his-
tory are numerous and important. They may be divided into
two classes: Works on Universal History, of which Ancient
History forms only a part; Works exclusively devoted to An-
cient History.

To the first class belong:

" The Universal History, Ancient and Modern," with maps and ad-
ditions. London, 1736-44; 7 vols., folio. Reprinted in 8vo and 64
vols., London, 1747-66; again, in 60 vols., with omissions and additions.

Raleigh, Sir W., " History of the World," in his " Works." Oxford,
Clarendon Press, 1829; 8 vols., 8vo.

Bossuet, " Discours sur I'Histoire Universelle." Paris, 1681; 4to.
(Translated into English by Rich. Spencer. London, 1730; 8vo.)

Millot, " Elemens de I'Histoire Generale." Paris, 1772 et seqq. Re-
printed at Edinburgh, 1823; 6 vols., 8vo. (Translated into English,
1778; 2 vols., 8vo.)

Eichhorn, " Weltgeschichte." Leipsic, 1799-1820; 5 vols., 8vo.

Keightley, Th., " Outlines of History," 8vo, being vol. ix. of Lard-
ner's " Cabinet Cyclopaedia." London, 1835 et seqq. A convenient
abridgment.

Tytler and Nares, " Elements of General History." London, 1825.
" Owes its reputation and success to the want of a better work on the
subject."

Under the second head may be mentioned:

Niebuhr, B. G., " Vortrage uber alte Geschichte." Berlin, 1847; 3
vols., 8vo. Edited after his death by his son, Marcus Niebuhr. (Trans-
lated into English by Dr. Leonard Schmitz, with additions and cor-

ANCIENT HISTORY 7

rcctions. London, 1852; 3 vols., 8vo.) A work of the highest value,
embodying all the results of modern discovery up to about the year 1830.

Schlosser, " Universal-historische Uebersicht der Geschichte der
alten Welt" Frankfort, 1826; 3 vols., 8vo.

Bredow, " Handbuch der alte Geschichte." Altona, 1799; 8vo.
(Translated into English. London, 1827; 8vo.)

Smith, Philip, *' An Ancient History from the Elarliest Records to
the Fall of the Western Empire." London, 1865; 3 vols., 8vo. Em-
bodies the latest results of modern discovery.

Heeren, " Ideen iiber die Politik, den Verkehr, und den Handel der
vomehmsten Volker der alten Welt " ; 4th edition. Gottingen, 1824.
(Translated into English. Oxford, 1833 et seqq.; 5 vols., 8vo.) A
work which, so far as the commerce of the ancients is concerned, has
not been superseded.

A few modem works of a less comprehensive character than
those hitherto described, but still belonging rather to general
than to particular history, seem also to deserve mention here.
Such are :

Rollin, " Histoire Ancienne des Egyptiens, des Carthaginiens, des
Assyriens, des Medes et des Perses, des Macedoniens, et des Grecs."
Paris, 1824; 12 vols., 8vo, revue par Letronne. "The last and best
edition." (Translated into English. London, 1768; 7 vols.. 8vo.) The
earlier portion of this work is now antiquated, and must be replaced
by writers who have had the advantage of recent discoveries.

Rawlinson, G., " The Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient Eastern
World, or the History, Geography, and Antiquities of Chaldsea, As-
syria, Babylonia, Media, and Persia." London, 1862-67; 4 vols., 8vo.
With numerous illustrations.

The fact that all historical events must occur at a certain
time and in a certain place attaches to History two branches
of knowledge as indispensable auxiliaries; viz., (Thronology
and Geography. By the universal historian these sciences
should be known completely: and a fair knowledge of them
ought to be acquired by every historical student. A fixed
mode of computing time, and an exact or approximate reckon-
ing of the period occupied by the events narrated, is essential
to every methodized history; nor can any history be regarded
as complete without a more or less elaborate description of
the countries which were the theatres of the events recorded
in it.

Exact Chronology is difficult, and a synchronistic view of

8 RAWLINSON

history generally is impossible without the adoption of an era.
Nations accordingly, as the desire of exactness or the wish to
synchronize arose, invented eras for themselves, which gen-
erally remained in use for many hundreds of years. The earliest
known instance of the formal assumption of a fixed point in
time from which to date events belongs to the history of Baby-
lon, where the era of Nabonassar, B.C. 747, appears to have
been practically in use from that year. The era of the founda-
tion of Rome, B.C. 752 (according to the best authorities),
was certainly not adopted by the Romans till after the expulsion
of the kings; nor did that of the Olympiads, B.C. 776, become
current in Greece until the time of Timaeus (about B.C. 300).
The Asiatic Greeks, soon after the death of Alexander, adopted
the era of the Seleucidae, B.C. 312. The era of Antioch, B.C.
49, was also commonly used in the East from that date till A.D.
600. The Armenian era, A.D. 553, and the Mohammedan,
A.D. 622 (the Hegira), are likewise worthy of notice.

The most important chronological monuments are the fol-
lowing:

The Assyrian Canon (discovered by Sir Henry Rawlinson among the
antiquities in the British Museum, and published by him in the Athe-
tueum, Nos. 1812 and 2064), an account of Assyrian chronology from
about B.C. 909 to B.C. 680, impressed on a number of clay tablets in the
reign of Sardanapalus, the son of Esarhaddon, all now more or less
broken, but supplying each other's deficiencies, and yielding by careful
comparison a complete chronological scheme, covering a space of 230
years. The chronology of the whole period is verified by a recorded
solar eclipse, which is evidently that of June 15, B.C. 763.

The Apis Stelas (discovered by M. Mariette, close to the Pyramid of
Abooseer, near Cairo), published in the " Zeitschrift fiir die Kunde des
Morgenlandes " for 1864, and also by M. de Rouge in his " Recherches
sur les monuments qu'on pent attribuer aux six premieres Dynasties
de Manethon." Paris, 1866. Most important for Egyptian chronology.

The Parian Marble (brought to England from Smyrna in the year
1627 by an agent of the Earl of Arundel, and presented to the University
of Oxford by his son; preserved among the "Arundel Marbles" in
the " Schola Philosophise Moralis," but in a very decayed condition),
a chronological arrangement of important events in Greek history from
the accession of Cecrops to the archonship of Callistratus, B.C. 355.
Best editions: " Marmora Arundeliana," ed. J. Selden. Londini, 1628.
"Marmora Oxoniensia," ed. R. Chandler. Oxoniis, 1763; folio.
" Marmor Parium," ed. C. Miiller, in Vol. I. of the " Fragmenta His-

ANCIENT HISTORY 9

toricum Graecorum." Parisiis, 1846. The inscription is also given in
Boeckh's Cort>us Inscriptiottum Gracarum, Vol. II., No. 2374.

The Fasti Capitolini (discovered at Rome on the site of the ancient
Forum, partly in the year 1547, partly in 181 7 and 1818, and still pre-
served in the Museum of the Capitol), a list of the Roman magistrates
and triumphs from the commencement of the Republic to the end of
the reign of Augustus. Best edition of the fragments discovered in
1547, the second of Sigonius, Venet. 1556. Best edition of the frag-
ments of 1817-18, that of Borghcsi, Milan, 1818. These Fasti are re-
produced in appendices to the first and second volumes of Dr. Arnold's
" History of Rome," down to the close of the first Punic War. An
excellent reprint and arrangement of the fragments will be found in
Mommsen's " Inscriptiones Latinae Antiquissimae." Berlin, 1863.

Ancient works on Chronology were numerous; but not many
have come down to our times. The subject first began to be
treated as a science by the Alexandrians in the third century
before Christ. Eratosthenes, ApoUodorus, Sosicrates, and
others undertook the task of arranging the events of past his-
tory according to exact chronological schemes, which were
no doubt sufficiently arbitrary. These writers were succeeded
by Castor (about B.C. 100-50), Cephalion, Julius Africanus
(A.D. 200), and Hippolytus, of whom the last two were Chris-
tians. The earliest work of a purely chronological character
which has come down to us is the following:

Eusebius Pamphili, " Chronicorum Canonum libri duo," The
Greek text is lost; but the latter book has been preserved to us in the
Latin translation of Jerome; and the greater part of both books exists
in an Armenian version, which has been rendered into Latin by the
Armenian monk, Zohrab, assisted by Cardinal Mai. (Mediolani, 1818;
folio.)

Other chronological works of importance are:

Georgius Syncellus, " Chronographia," in the " Corpus HisL By-
zant.," ed. Dindorf. Bonnae, 1829; 2 vols., 8vo.

Johannes Malalas, " Chronographia," in the same collection, ed.
Dindorf. Bonnx, 1831; 8vo.

" Chronicon Paschale," in the same collection. Bonnae, 1832; 2
vols., 8vo.

Scaliger, Jos., " De Emendatione Temporum." Genevae, 1629.

Ideler, *' Handbuch der Chronologic." Berlin. 1825-26; 2 vols., 8vo.

" L'Art de Verifier les Dates." Paris, 1819-44; 36 vols., 8vo.

Hales, W., '* New Analysis of Chronology, explaining the History
and Antiquities of the Primitive Nations of the World." London,

lo RAWLINSON

1809-12; 3 vols., 4to. New edition, corrected and improved, 1830; 4
vols., Svo.

Clinton, H. F., " Fasti Hellenic! ; or. The Civil and Literary Chronol-
ogy of Greece from the Fifty-fifth Olympiad to the Death of Augustus."
Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1827-30; 3 vols., 4to. A valuable work, not
confined to the chronology of Greece, but embracing that of all the
Asiatic kingdoms and empires from the earliest times to Alexander's
conquest of Persia.

Geography, the other ancillary science to History, was
recognized from a very early date as closely connected v^ith it.
The History of Herodotus is almost as much geographical as
historical: and the geographical element occupies a consider-
able space in the histories of many other ancient writers, as
notably Polybius and Diodorus. At the same time the sepa-
rability of geography, and its claims to be regarded as a distinct
branch of knowledge, were perceived almost from the first;
and works upon it, whereof only fragments remain, were written
by HecatJEUs of Miletus, Scylax of Caryanda, Charon of Lamp-
sacus, Damastes, Eratosthenes, Agatharchides, Scymnus of
Chios, and others. The most important of the extant classical
works on the subject are:

The " Periplus Maris Mediterranei," ascribed to Scylax of Caryanda,
but really the work of an unknown writer belonging to the time of
Philip of Macedon. Ed. D. Hoeschel, August. Vind., 1608. Printed
also in Hudson's " Geographi Minores," Oxoniis, 1703; and in C.
Miiller's " Geographi Graeci Minores." Paris, 1855.

Strabo, " Geographica," in seventeen books, the most important an-
cient work on the subject. Best editions: that of Is. Casaubon, Parisiis,
1620, folio; that of Th. Falconer, Oxoniis, 1807, 2 vols., folio; that of
Siebenkees, Lipsiae, 1796-1811, 6 vols., 8vo; and that of Kramer, Bero-
lini, 1847-52, 3 vols., 8vo.

Dionysius, " Periegesis," written in hexameter verse. Published,
with the commentary of Eustathius, by H. Stephanus. Parisiis, 1577.
It will be found also in the " Geographi Graeci Minores " of Bernhardy
(Leipsic, 1828) and of C. Miiller.

Plinius, " Historia Naturalis," in thirty-seven books. Best edition,
that of Sillig. Gotha:; 8 vols., 8vo.

Ptolemaeus, " Geographia," in eight books. Ed. Bertius, Amstel.,
1618; folio.

Pomponius Mela, " Cosmographia, sive De Situ Orbis," in three
books. Edited by H. Stephanus, together with the " Periegesis " of
Dionysius. Parisiis, 1577. Best edition, that of Tzschucke. Lipsae,
1807; 7 vols., Svo.

ANCIENT HISTORY ii

And for the geography of Greece:

Paasanias, " Pericgesis Helladis," in ten books. Best editions: that
of Sicbelis, Lipsiae, 1822-28. 5 vols., 8vo; and that of Bekker, Berlin,
1826-27, 2 vols., 8vo.

Modem works on the subject of Ancient Geography are
numerous, but only a few are of a general character. Among
these may be noticed:

Cellarius, " Notitia Orbis Antiqui." Lipsiae, 1701-06; 2 vols., 4to.
" Cum observationibus," J. C. Schwartzii. Lipsiae, 1771 and 1773.

Mannert, " Geographie der Griechen und Romer." Ntirnberg, 1801-
31 ; 10 vols., 8vo.

Gosselin, " Recherches sur la Geographie systematique et positive
des Anciens." Paris, 1798-1813; 4 vols., 4to.

Rennell, J., " Geography of Herodotus." London, 1800; 4to. And
the same writer's " Treatise on the Comparative Geography of Asia
Minor," with an Atlas. London, 1831; 2 vols., 8vo.

Ritter, *' Erdkunde." Berlin, 1832 et seqq. A most copious and
learned work, embracing all the results of modern discovery up to the
date of the publication of each volume.

Smith, Dr. W., " Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geogfraphy." Lon-
don, 1854; 2 vols., 8vo.

Among useful compendiums are —

Laurent, P. E., " Introduction to Ancient Geography." Oxford,
1813; 8vo.

Arrowsmith. A., " Compendium of Ancient and Modem Geography,
for the use of Eton School." London, 1830; 8vo.

The best Atlases illustrative of Ancient Geography are the
following:

Kiepert, " Atlas von Hellas," with supplementary maps. Berlin,
1846-51. Also the same geographer's " Atlas Antiquus." Berlin, 1861.

Miiller. C, Maps accompanying the " Geographi Graeci Minores."
Paris, 1855.

Johnston, A. Keith, " Atlas of Qassical Geography." Edinburgh,
1866; 4to.

Smith, Dr. W., " Biblical and Qassical Atlas." London, 1868; small
folio.

The field of Ancient History may be mapped out either syn-
chronistically, according to certain periods and epochs, or

,2 RAWLINSON

ethnographically, according to states and nations. Neither of
these two methods is absokitely superior to the other, each
having merits in which the other is deficient. It would be
embarrassing to have to choose between them ; but, fortunately,
this difficulty is obviated by the possibility of combining the
two into one system. This combined method, which has been
already preferred as most convenient by other writers of
Manuals, will be adopted in the ensuing pages, where the
general division of the subject will be as follows:

Book I. — History of the Ancient Asiatic and African States
and Kingdoms from the Earliest Times to the Foundation of
the Persian Monarchy by Cyrus the Great, B.C. 558.

Book II. — History of the Persian Monarchy from the Acces-
sion of Cyrus to the Death of Darius Codomannus, B.C.
558-330.

Book III. — History of the Grecian States, both in Greece
Proper and elsewhere, from the Earliest Times to the Acces-
sion of Alexander, B.C. 336.

Book IV. — History of the Macedonian Monarchy, and the
Kingdoms into which it broke up, until their absorption into
the Roman Empire.

Book V. — History of Rome from the Earliest Times to the
Fall of the Western Empire, A.D. 476, and Parallel History
of Parthia.

BOOK I

HISTORY OF ASIATIC AND AFRICAN
NATIONS

BOOK I

HISTORY OF THE ANCIENT ASIATIC AND AFRICAN
STATES AND KINGDOMS FROM THE EARLIEST
TIMES TO THE FOUNDATION OF THE PERSIAN
MONARCHY BY CYRUS THE GREAT.

PART I.— ASIATIC NATIONS.

PRELIMINARY REMARKS ON THE GEOGRAPHY

OF ASIA.

Asia is the largest of the three great divisions of the Eastern
Hemisphere. Regfarding it as separated from Africa by the
Red Sea and Isthmus of Suez, and from Europe by the Ural
Mountains, the Ural River, the Caspian Sea, and the main
chain of the Caucasus, its superficial contents will amount to
17,500,000 square miles, whereas those of Africa are less than
12,000,000, and those of Europe do not exceed 3,800,000. In
climate it unites greater varieties than either of the two other
divisions, extending as it does from the 78th degree of north
latitude to within a hundred miles of the equator. It thus lies
mainly within the northern temperate zone, but projects north-
ward a distance of eleven degrees beyond the Arctic circle,
while southward it throws into the region of the Tropics three
long and broad peninsulas.

Asia consists mainly of a g^eat central table-land, running
east and west from the neighborhood oi the Mgean to the
north-western frontier of China, with low plains surrounding
it, which are for the most part fertile and well watered. The
high table-land is generally bounded by mountain-chains,
which mostly run parallel to it in latitudinal lines. In places
these primary latitudinal chains give way to others, which run
in an opposite or longitudinal direction.

i6 RAWLINSON

The Rivers of Asia may be divided into two classes — ^those
of the central tract, and those of the circumjacent regions. The
rivers of the central tract are continental or mediterranean;
i.e., they begin and end without reaching the sea. Either they
form after a while salt lakes in which their waters are evap-
orated, or they gradually waste away and lose themselves in
the sands of deserts. The rivers of the circumjacent plains are,
on the contrary, oceanic ; i.e., they mingle themselves with the
waters of the great deep.

Asia may conveniently be divided into Northern, Central,
and Southern, the Southern region being again subdivided into
a Western and an Eastern portion. It is with South-western
Asia that Ancient History is almost exclusively concerned.

Northern Asia, or the tract lying north of the Caspian Sea,
the Jaxartes, and the Altai mountain-chain, is for the most
part a great grassy plain, of low elevation, destitute of trees,
and unproductive, the layer of vegetable soil being thin. To-
wards the north this plain merges into vast frozen wilds capable
of nourishing only a few hunters. In the west the Ural and
Altai, in the east the Jablonnoi, and their offshoot the Tukulan,
are the only mountains. The rivers are numerous, and abound
in fish. The Ural and Altai chains are rich in valuable min-
erals, as gold, silver, platina, copper, and iron. This region
was almost unknown to the ancients, who included it under
the vague name of Scythia. Some scanty notices of it occur,
however, in Herodotus.

Central Asia, or the region bounded on the north by the
Altai, on the west by the Caspian, on the south by the Elburz,
the Hindu Kush, and the Himalaya, on the east by the Yun-
ling and other Chinese ranges, consists, excepting in its more
western portion, of an elevated plateau or table-land, which
towards the south is not less than 10,000 feet, and towards
the north is from 4,000 to 2,600 feet above the level of the sea.
This plateau is intersected by the two great chains of the Thian-
chan and the Kuen-lun, and otherwise diversified by impor-
tant ridges. Towards the north the soil admits of pasturage,
and in the west and south are some rich plains and valleys;
but the greater part of the region consists of sandy deserts.
Outside the western boundary of the plateau, which is formed

ANCIENT HISTORY 17

by the Bolor and other " longitudinal " chains, a low plain
succeeds, a continuation of the Siberian steppe, which consists
also, in the main, of sandy desert, excepting along the courses
of the streams.

A small portion only of Central Asia — lying towards the west
and the south-west — was known to the ancients. In the low
region between the Elburz range and the Siberian steppe, upon
the courses of the two gfreat streams which flow down from
the plateau, were three countries of some importance. These
were —

Chorasmia, to the extreme west, between the Caspian and
the lower Oxus — a desolate region, excepting close along the
river-bank, known still as Kharesm, and forming part of the
Khanat of Khiva.

Sogdiana, between the lower Oxus and the lower Jaxartes,
resembling Chorasmia in its western portion, but towards the
east traversed by spurs of the Bolor and the Thian-chan, and
watered by numerous streams descending from them. The
chief of these was the Polytimctus of the Greeks, on which
was Maracanda (Samarkand), the capital.

Bactria, on the upper Oxus, between Sogdiana and the
Paropamisus (Hindu Kush). Mountainous, fertile, and well
watered towards the east, but towards the west descending into
the desert. Chief cities, Bactra (Balkh), the capital, a little
south of the Oxus, and Margus (Merv), on a stream of its own,
in the western desert.

Southern Asia, according to the division of the continent
which has been here preferred, comprises all the countries lying
north of the Black Sea, the Caucasus, the Caspian, and the
Elburz, Hindu Kush, and Himalaya ranges, together with those
lying east of the Yun-ling, the Ala-chan, and the Khing^,
which form the eastern boundary of the central table-land. A
line drawn along the ninety-second meridian (E. from Green-
wich) will separate this tract, at the point where it is narrowest,
into an Eastern and Western region, the former containing
Manchuria, China, and the Siamo-Burmese peninsula, the lat-
ter Hindustan, Affghanistan, Beluchistan, Persia, the Russian
Transcaucasian provinces, Turkey in Asia, and Arabia. With
the Eastern region Ancient History has no concern at all, since

i8 RAWLINSON

it was unknown to the great nations of antiquity, and whatever
history it has belongs to the Modern rather than to the Ancient
period. With the Western region Ancient History is, on the
contrary, concerned vitally and essentially, since this region
formed in -the early times, if not the sole, yet at any rate the
chief, stage on which the historical drama was exhibited.

South-western Asia is naturally divisible into four main
regions — viz., Asia Minor, or the peninsula of Anatolia; the
adjoining table-land, or the tract which lies between Asia Minor
and the Valley of the Indus; the lowland south of this table-
land, which stretches from the base of the mountains to the
shores of the Indian Ocean; and the Indian Peninsula.

Asia Minor consists of a central table-land, of moderate
elevation, lying between the two parallel chains of Taurus and
Olympus, together with three coast-tracts, situated respectively
north, west, and south of the plateau. Its chief rivers are the
Iris (Yechil Irmak), the Halys (Kizil Irmak), and the Sangarius
''Sakkariyeh), which all fall into the Euxine, Its loftiest moun-
tain is Argaeus, near Caesarsea (Kaisariyeh), which attains an
altitude of 13,000 feet. On the highest part of the plateau,
which is towards the south, adjoining Taurus, are a number
of salt lakes, into which the rivers of this region empty them-
selves. The largest is the Palus Tattseus (Touz Ghieul), which
extends about forty-five miles in its greatest length. Asia
Minor contained in the times anterior to Cyrus the following
countries: — On the plateau, two: Phrygia and Cappadocia;
boundary between them, the Halys. In the northern coast-
tract, two: Paphlagonia and Bithynia; boundary, the Billseus
(Filiyas). In the western coast-tract, three: Mysia, Lydia,
and Caria, with the ^olian, Ionian, and Dorian Greeks occupy-
ing most of the sea-board. In the southern coast-tract, three :
Lycia, Pamphylia, and Cilicia. The chief cities were Sardis,
the capital of Lydia; Dascyleium, of Bithynia; Gordium, of
Phrygia; Xanthus, of Lycia; Tarsus, of CiHcia; and Mazaca
(afterwards Caesaraea), of Cappadocia ; together with the Gre-
cian settlements of Miletus, Phocaea, Ephesus, Smyrna, Hali-
camassus, and Cnidus on the west, and Cyzicus, Heraclea,
Sinope, Amisus, Cerasus, and Trapezus upon the north.

Islands. The littoral islands belonging to Asia Minor were

ANCIENT HISTORY 19

important and numerous. The principal were Proconnesus in
the Propontis; Tenedos, Lesbos (capital Mytilene), Chios,
Samos, and Rhodes, in the JEgean; and Cyprus in the Levant
or Eastern Mediterranean. The chief towns of Cyprus were
Salamis, Citium, and Paphos, on the coast ; and, in the interior,
Idalium.

The great highland extending from Asia Minor in the west
to the mountains which border the Indus Valley in the east,
comprised seventeen countries — viz., Armenia, Iberia or Sape-
iria, Colchis, Matiene, Media, Persia, Mycia, Sagartia, Cadusia,
Hyrcania, Parthia, Aria, Arachosia, Sattagydia, Gandaria,
Sarang^a, and Gedrosia or the Eastern Ethiopia. As these
countries were mostly of considerable size and importance, a
short description will be given of each.

Armenia lay east of Cappadocia. It was a lofty region,
consisting almost entirely of mountains, and has been well
called " the Switzerland of Western Asia." The mountain
system culminates in Ararat, which has an elevation of 17,000
feet. Hence all the great rivers of this part of Asia take their
rise, viz., the Tigris, the Euphrates, the Halys, the Araxes, and
the Cyrus. In the highest part of the region occur two elevated
lake-basins, those of Urumiyeh and Van, each having a distinct
and separate water-system of its own. The only town an-
ciently of much importance was one which occupied the posi-
tion of the modern Van, on the east coast of the lake of the
same name.

Iberia, or Sapeiria, adjoined Armenia to the north-east. It
comprised the whole of the modern Georgia, together with
some parts of Russian and Turkish Armenia, as especially the
region about Kars, Ispir, and Akhaltsik. Its rivers were the
Cyrus (Kur) and Araxes (Aras), which flow together into the
Caspian. It had one lake, Lake Goutcha or Sivan, in the
mountain region north-east of Ararat.

Colchis, or the valley of the Phasis, between the Caucasus
and Western Iberia, corresponded to the modem districts of
Imeritia, Mingjelia, and Guriel. Its chief importance lay in
its commanding one of the main routes of early commerce,
which passed by way of the Oxus, Caspian, Aras, and Phasis
to the Euxine. (Connect with this the Argonautic expedition.)

20 RAWLINSON

Chief town, Phasis, at the mouth of the Rion River, a Greek
settlement. Natives of Colchis, black: believed to be Egyp-
tians.

Matiene was a strip of mountain land, running southward
from Sapeiria, and separating between Assyria and Media
Magna. It early lost its name, and was reckoned to one or
other of the adjoining countries.

Media, one of the largest and most important of the regions
belonging to this group, extended from the Araxes on the
north to the desert beyond Isfahan on the south. Eastward
it reached to the Caspian Gates; westward it was bounded
by Matiene, or (when Matiene disappeared) by Armenia and
Assyria. Its chief rivers were the Araxes (Aras) and the
Mardus (Kizil Uzen or Sefid-rud). It consisted of two re-
gions, Northern Media, or Media Atropatene (Azerbijan), and
Southern Media, or Media Magna. The whole territory was
mountainous, except towards the south-east, where it abutted
on the Sagartian desert. The soil was mostly sterile, but some
tracts were fairly, and a few richly, productive. The chief
cities were Ecbatana and Rhages.

Persia lay south and south-east of Media, extending from
the Median frontier across the Zagros mountain-chain, to the
shores of the gulf whereto it gave name. It was barren and
unfruitful towards the north and east, where it ran into the
Sagartian desert ; mountainous and fairly fertile in the central
region ; and a tract of arid sand along the coast. Its rivers
were few and of small size. Two, the Oroatis (Tab) and Granis
(Khisht river), flowed southward into the Persian Gulf; one,
the Araxes (Bendamir), with its tributary the Cyrus (Pulwar),
ran eastward, and terminated in a salt lake (Neyriz or Bakh-
tigan). The principal cities were Persepolis, Pasargadae, and
Carmana, which last was the capital of a district of Persia,
called Carmania.

Mycia was a small tract south-east of Persia, on the shores
of the Persian Gulf, opposite the island of Kishm and the pro-
montory of Ras Mussendum. It was ultimately absorbed into
Persia Proper.

Sagartia was at once the largest and the most thinly peopled
of the plateau countries. It comprised the whole of the great

ANCIENT HISTORY 21

desert of Iran, which reaches from Kashan and Koum on the
west to Sarawan and Quettah towards the east, a distance of
above 900 miles. It was bounded on the north by Media,
Parthia, and Aria; on the east by Sarang^a and Sattagydia;
on the south by Mycia and the Eastern Ethiopia ; on the west
by Media and Persia. It contained in ancient times no city
of importance, the inhabitants being nomads, whose flocks
found a scanty pasturage on the less barren portions of the
great upland.

Cadusia, or the country of the Cadusians, was a thin strip
of territory along the south-eastern and southern shores of the
Caspian, corresponding to the modem Ghilan and Mazande-
ran. Strictly speaking, it scarcely belonged to the plateau,
since it lay outside the Elburz range, on the northern slopes
of the chain, and between them and the Caspian Sea. It con-
tained no city of importance, but was fertile, well wooded, and
well watered; and sustained a numerous population.

Hyrcania lay east of Cadusia, at the south-eastern corner
of the Caspian, where the name still exists in the modern river
Gurg^n. The chain of the Elburz here broadens out to a
width of 200 miles, and a fertile region is formed containing
many rich valleys and high mountain pastures, together with
some considerable plains. The chief city of Hyrcania was
Zadracarta.

Parthia lay south and south-east of Hyrcania, including
the sunny flank of the Elburz chain, and the flat country at
its base as far as the northern edge of the desert, where it
bordered on Sagartia. It was a narrow but fertile territory,
watered by the numerous streams which here descend from
the mountains.

Aria, the modern territory of Herat, adjoined Parthia on the
east. It was a small but fertile tract on the river Arius (the Heri-
rud), with a capital city, called Aria or Artacoana (Herat).

Arachosia, east of Aria, comprised most of Western and
Central Affghanistan. Its rivers were the Etymandrus (Hel-
mend) and the Arachotus (Arghand-ab). The capital was
Arachotus (Kandahar?). It was an extensive country, moun-
tainous and generally barren, but containing a good deal of
fair pasturage, and a few fertile vales.

2a RAWLINSON

Sattagydia adjoined Arachosia on the east, corresponding
to South-eastern Affghanistan, or the tract between Kandahar
and the Indus valley. In character it closely resembled Ara-
chosia, but was on the whole wilder and more rugged.

Gandaria lay above Sattagydia, comprising the modern
Kabul and Kaferistan. It consisted of a mass of tangled moun-
tain-chains, with fertile valleys between them, often, however,
narrowing to gorges difficult to penetrate. Its principal
stream was the Cophen (or river of Kabul), a tributary of the
Indus, and its chief town Caspatyrus (Kabul?).

Sarangia, or Zarangia, was the tract lying about the salt
lake (Hamoon) into which the Etymandrus (Helmend) emp-
ties itself. This tract is flat, and generally desert, except along
the courses of the many streams which flow into the Hamoon
from the north and east.

Gedrosia corresponded to the modern Beluchistan. It lay
south of Sarangia, Arachosia, and Sattagydia, and east of
Sagartia and Mycia. On the east its boundary was the Indus
valley ; on the south it was washed by the Indian Ocean. It
was a region of alternate rock and sand, very scantily watered,
and almost entirely destitute of wood. The chief town was
Pura (perhaps Bunpoor).

The lowland to the south, or rather the south-west, of the
great West- Asian plateau, comprised five countries only : viz.,
Syria, Arabia, Assyria, Susis or Susiana, and Babylonia. Each
of these requires a short notice.

Syria, bounded by Cilicia on the north, the Euphrates on the
north-east, the Arabian desert on the south-east and south, and
by the Levant upon the west, comprised the following regions :
1st. Syria Proper, or the tract reaching from Amanus to Her-
mon and Palmyra. Chief cities in the ante-Cyrus period:
Carchemish, Hamath, Damascus, Baalbek, and Tadmor or
Palmyra. Chief river, the Orontes. Mountains : Casius, Bar-
gylus, Libanus, and anti-Libanus. 2d. Phoenicia, the coast-
tract from the thirty-fifth to the thirty-third parallel, separated
from Syria Proper by the ridge of Libanus. Chief towns:
Tyre, Sidon, Berytus, Byblus, Tripolis, Aradus. 3d. Pales-
tine, comprising Galilee, Samaria, Judaea, and Philistia, or
Palestine Proper. Chief cities: Jerusalem, Samaria, Azotus

ANCIENT HISTORY 23

or Ashdod, Ascalon, and Gaza or Cadytis. Mountains : Her-
mon, Carmel. River, Jordan. Northern and Western Syria
are mountainous, and generally fertile. Eastern Syria is an
arid desert, broken only by a few oases, of which the Palmy-
rene is the principal.

Arabia lay south and south-east of Syria. It was a country
of enormous size, being estimated to contain a million of
square miles, or more than one-fourth the area of Europe.
Consisting, however, as it does, mainly of sandy or rocky
deserts, its population must always have been scanty, and its
productions few. In the ancient world it was never of much
account, the inhabitants being mainly nomads, and only the
outlying tribes coming into contact with the neighboring na-
tions. The only important towns were, in the east, Gerrha,
a great trading settlement ; in the west, Petra and Elath.

Assyria intervened between Syria and Media. It was
bounded on the north by the snowy chain of Niphates, which
separated it from Armenia, and on the east by the outer ranges
of Zagros. Westward its limit was the Euphrates, while south-
ward it adjoined on Babylonia and Susiana. Towards the
north and east it included some mountain tracts ; but in the
main it was a great rolling plain, at a low level, scantily watered
towards the west, where the Euphrates has few affluents, but
well supplied towards the east, where Mount Zagros sends
down many large streams to join the Tigris. Its chief cities
were Ninus, or Nineveh, Calah, and Asshur upon the Tig^s ;
Arbela in the region between the Tigfris and Mount Zagros;
Nisibis, Amida, Harran or Carrhae, and Circesium in the dis-
trict between the g^eat rivers. Its streams, besides the Tigris
and Euphrates, were the Bilichus (Belik) and the Chaboras
(Western Khabour), affluents of the Euphrates ; the Centrites
(Bitlis Chai), the Elastem Khabour, the Zabatus (or Zab Ala),
the Caprus (or Zab Asfal), and the Gyndes or Physcus (Diya-
leh), tributaries of the Tigris. It contained on the north the
mountain range of Masius (Jebel Tur and Karajah Dagh).
Its chief districts were Aturia, or Assyria Proper, the tract
about Nineveh; Adiabene, the country between the Upper
Zab and the Lower ; Chalonitis, the region south of the Lower
Zab ; and Gozan (or Mygdonia) on the Western Khabour at

RAWLINSON

the foot of the Mons Masius. The Greeks called the whole
tract between the two great rivers Mesopotamia.

Susis, Susiana or Cissia, lay south-east of Assyria, and con-
sisted chiefly of the low plain between the Zagros range and
the Tigris, but comprised also a portion of the mountain re-
gion. Its rivers were the Choaspes (Kerkheh), the Pasitigris
(Kuran), the Eulaeus (a branch stream formerly running from
the Choaspes into the Pasitigris), and the Hedypnus (Jerrahi).
Capital city, Susa, between the Choaspes and Eulaeus rivers.

Babylonia lay due south of Assyria, in which it was some-
times included. The Une of demarkation between them was
the limit of the alluvium. On the east Babylonia was bounded
by Susiana, on the west by Arabia, and on the south by the
Persian Gulf. It was a single alluvial plain of vast extent and
extraordinary fertility. The chief cities, besides Babylon on
the Euphrates, were Ur (now Mugheir), Erech (Warka), Cal-
neh (Niffer), Cutha (Ibrahim), Sippara or Sepharvaim (Mo-
saib), and Borsippa (Birs-Nimrud). The more southern part
of Babylonia, bordering on Arabia and the Persian Gulf, was
known as Chaldaea.

The Peninsula of Hindustan, the last of the four great divis-
ions of South-western Asia, contains nearly a million and
a quarter of square miles. Nature has divided it into three very
distinct tracts, one towards the north-west, consisting of the
basin drained by the Indus ; one towards the east, or the basin
drained by the Ganges; and one towards the south, or the
peninsula proper. Of these the north-western only was con-
nected with the history of the ancient world.

This tract, called India from the river on which it lay, was
separated off from the rest of Hindustan by a broad belt of
desert. It comprised two regions — ist, that known in mod-
ern times as the Punjab, abutting immediately on the Him-
alaya chain, and containing about 50,000 square miles ; a vast
triangular plain, intersected by the courses of five great rivers
(whence Punj-ab = Five Rivers) — the Indus, the Hydaspes
(Jelum), the Acesines (Chenab), the Hydraotes (Ravee), and
the Hyphasis (Sutlej), — fertile along their course, but other-
wise barren. 2dly, the region known as Scinde, or the
Indus valley below the Punjab, a tract of about the same size,

ANCIENT HISTORY 95

including the rich plain of Cutchi Gandava on the west bank
of the river, and the broad delta of the Indus towards the south.
Chief town of the upper region, Taxila (Attok) ; of the south-
ern, Pattala (Tatta?).

PRELIMINARY OBSERVATIONS ON THE GEN-
ERAL CHARACTER OF THE EARLY
ASIATIC KINGDOMS.

The physical conformation of Western Asia is favorable
to the growth of large empires. In the vast plain which ex-
tends from the foot of Niphates and Zagros to the Persian
Gulf, the Red Sea, and the Mediterranean, there are no natural
fastnesses ; and the race which is numerically or physically
superior to the other races inhabiting it readily acquires do-
minion over the entire region. Similarly, only not quite to the
same extent, in the upland region which succeeds to this plain
upon the east, there is a deficiency of natural barriers, and the
nation which once begins to excel its neighbors, rapidly ex-
tends its influence over a wide stretch of territory. The upland
and lowland powers are generally pretty evenly balanced, and
maintain a struggle in which neither side gfives way ; but occa-
sionally the equality becomes deranged. Circumstances give
to the one or to the other additional strength ; and the result
is that its rival is overpowered. Then an empire of still greater
extent is formed, both upland and lowland falling under the
sway of the same people.

Still more remarkable than this uniformity of size is the
uniformity of governmental type observable throughout all
these empires. The form of government is in every case a
monarchy ; the monarchy is always hereditary ; and the hered-
itary monarch is a despot. A few feeble checks are in some
instances devised for the purpose of restraining within certain
limits the caprice or the cruelty of the holder of power; but
these barriers, where they exist, are easily overleaped; and
in most cases there is not even any such semblance of inter-
ference with the will of the ruler, who is the absolute master of
the lives, liberties, and property of his subjects. Despotism

26 RAWLINSON

is the simplest, coarsest, and rudest of all the forms of civil
government. It was thus naturally the first which men,
pressed by a sudden need, extemporized. And in Asia the wish
has never arisen to improve upon this primitive and imperfect
essay.

Some variety is observable in the internal organization of
the empires. In the remoter times it was regarded as sufficient
to receive the personal submission of the monarch whose land
was conquered, to assess his tribute at a certain amount, and
then to leave him in the unmolested enjoyment of his former
dignity. The head of an empire was thus a " king of kings,"
and the empire itself was an aggregation of kingdoms. After
a while an improvement was made on the simplicity of this
early system. Satraps, or provincial governors, court officials
belonging to the conquering nation, and holding their office
only during the good pleasure of the Great King, were sub-
stituted for the native monarchs; and arrangements more or
less complicated were devised for checking and controlling
them in the exercise of their authority. The power of the head
of the empire was thus considerably increased ; and the empire
acquired a stability unknown under the previous system. Uni-
formity of administration was to a certain extent secured. At
the same time, a very great diversity underlay this external
uniformity, since the conquered nations were generally suf-
fered to retain their own language, religion, and usages. No
effort was made even to interfere with their laws ; and thus
the provinces continued, after the lapse of centuries, as separate
and distinct in tone, feeling, ideas, and aspirations, as at the
time when they were conquered. The sense of separateness
was never lost ; the desire of recovering national independence,
at best, slumbered; nothing was wanted but opportunity to
stir up the dormant feeling, and to shatter the seeming unity
of the empire into a thousand fragments.

A characteristic of the Oriental monarchies, which very
markedly distinguishes them from the kingdoms of the West,
is the prevalence of polygamy. The polygamy of the monarch
swells to excessive numbers the hangers-on of the court, neces-
sitates the building of a vast palace, encourages effeminacy
and luxury, causes the annual outlay of enormous sums on

ANCIENT HISTORY 27

the maintenance of the royal household, introduces a degraded
and unnatural class of human beings into positions of trust and
dignity ; in a word, at once saps the vital force of the empire
in its central citadel, and imposes heavy burdens on the mass
of the population, which tend to produce exhaustion and paral-
ysis of the whole body politic. The practice of polygamy
among the upper classes, destroying the domestic affections
by diluting them, degrades and injures the moral character of
those who give its tone to the nation, lowers their physical
energy, and renders them self-indulgent and indolent. Nor
do the lower classes, though their poverty saves them from
participating directly in the evil, escape unscathed. Yielding,
as they commonly do, to the temptation of taking money for
their daughters from the proprietors of harems, they lose by
degrees all feeling of self-respect ; the family bond, corrupted
in its holiest element, ceases to have an elevating influence;
and the traffickers in their own flesh and blood become the
ready tools of tyrants, the ready applauders of crime, and the
submissive victims of every kind of injustice and oppression.
The Asiatic Empires were always founded upon conquest;
and conquest implies the possession of military qualities in the
victors superior at any rate to those of the vanquished nations.
Usually the conquering people were at first simple in their
habits, brave, hardy, and, comparatively speaking, poor. The
immediate consequence of their victory was the exchange of
poverty for riches; and riches usually brought in their train
the evils of luxurious living and idleness. The conquerors
rapidly deteriorated under such influences ; and, if it had not
been for the common practice of confining the use of arms,
either wholly or mainly, to their own class, they might, in a
very few generations, have had to change places with their
subjects. Even in spite of this practice they continually de-
creased in courage and warlike spirit. The monarchs usually
became faineants, and confined themselves to the precincts of
the palace. The nobles left oflF altogether the habit of athletic
exercise. Military expeditions grew to be infrequent. When
they became a necessity in consequence of revolt or of border
ravages, the deficiencies of the native troops had to be supplied
by the employment of foreig^n mercenaries, who cared nothing

38 RAWLINSON

for the cause in which their swords were drawn. Meanwhile,
the conquerors were apt to quarrel among themselves. Great
satraps would revolt and change their governments into inde-
pendent sovereignties. Pretenders to the crown would start
up among the monarch's nearest relatives, and the strength
and resources of the state would be wasted in civil conflicts.
The extortion of provincial governors exhausted the prov-
inces, while the corruption of the court weakened the empire
at its centre. Still, the tottering edifice would stand for years,
or even for centuries, if there was no attack from abroad, by
a mere vis inertice; but, sooner or later, such an attack was
sure to come, and then the unsubstantial fabric gave way at
once and crumbled to dust under a few blows vigorously dealt
by a more warlike nation.

HISTORY OF THE ANCIENT ASIATIC KING-
DOMS PREVIOUS TO CYRUS.

CHALDJEAN MONARCHY.

The earliest of the Asiatic monarchies sprang up in the
alluvial plain at the head of the Persian Gulf. Here Moses
places the first " kingdom " (Gen. x. lo) ; and here Berosus
regarded a Chaldaean monarchy as established probably as
early as B.C. 2000. The Hebrew records give Nimrod as the
founder of this kingdom, and exhibit Chedorlaomer as lord-
paramount in the region not very long afterwards. The names
of the kings in the lists of Berosus are lost ; but we are told
that he mentioned by name forty-nine Chaldaean monarchs,
whose reigns covered a space of 458 years from about B.C.
2000 to about B.C. 1543. The primeval monuments of the
country have yielded memorials of fifteen or sixteen kings,
who probably belonged to this early period. They were at any
rate the builders of the most ancient edifices now existing in
the country; and their date is long anterior to the time of
Sennacherib and Nebuchadnezzar. The phonetic reading of
these monumental names is too uncertain to justify their in-
sertion here. It will be sufficient to give, from Berosus, an

ANCIENT HISTORY 29

outline of the dynasties which ruled in Chaldsea, from about
B.C. 2000 to 747, the era of Nabonassar :

Chaldxan dynasty, ruling for 458 years

(Kings: Nimrod, Chedorlaomer) about B.C. 2001 to 1543

Arabian dynasty, ruling for 245 years about B.C. 1543 to 1298

Dynasty of forty-five kings, ruling for 526

years about B.C. 1298 to 772

Reign of Pul (say 25 years) about B.C. 772 to 747

Berosus, it will be observed, marks during this period two,
if not three, changes of dynasty. After the Chaldaeans have
borne sway for 458 years, they are succeeded by Arabs, who
hold the dominion for 245 years, when they too are super-
seded by a race not named, but probably Assyrian. This race
bears rule for 526 years, and then Pul ascends the throne, and
reigns for a term of years not stated. (Pul is called " king of
Assyria " in Scripture ; but this may be an inexactness. He
is not to be found among the Assyrian monumental kings.)
These changes of dynasty mark changes of condition. Under
the first or Chaldaean dynasty, and under the last monarch,
Pul, the country was flourishing and free. The second dynasty
was probably, and the third certainly, established by conquest.
Chaldaea, during the 526 years of the third dynasty, was of
secondary importance to Assyria, and though from time to
time engaged in wars with the dominant power of Western
Asia, was in the main submissive and even subject. The names
of six kings belonging to this dynasty have been recovered
from the Assyrian monuments. Among them is a Nebuchad-
nezzar, while the majority commence with the name of the
god Merodach.

The Chaldaean monarchy had from the first an architectural
character. Babylon, Erech or Orchoe, Accad, and Calneh,
were founded by Nimrod. Ur was from an early date a city
of importance. The attempt to build a tower " which should
reach to heaven," made here (Gen. xi. 4), was in accordance
with the general spirit of the Chaldaean people. Out of such
simple and rude materials as brick and bitumen vast edifices
were constructed, pyramidical in design, but built in steps or
stages of considerable altitude. Other arts also flourished.
Letters were in use; and the baked bricks employed by the

RAWLINSON

royal builders had commonly a legend in their centre. Gems
were cut, polished, and engraved with representations of hu-
man forms, portrayed with spirit. Metals of many kinds were
worked, and fashioned into arms, ornaments, and implements.
Textile fabrics of a delicate tissue were manufactured. Com-
merce was carried on with the neighboring nations both by
land and sea : the " ships of Ur " visiting the shores of the
Persian Gulf, and perhaps those of the ocean beyond it. The
study of Astronomy commenced, and observations of the heav-
enly bodies were made, and carefully recorded.

ASSYRIAN MONARCHY.

The traces which we possess of the First Period are chiefly
monumental. The Assyrian inscriptions furnish two lists —
one of three, and the other of four consecutive kings — which
belong probably to this early time. The seat of empire is at
first Asshur (now Kileh Sherghat), on the right bank of the
Tigris, about sixty miles below Nineveh. Some of the kings
are connected by intermarriage with the Chaldaean monarchs
of the period, and take part in the struggles of pretenders to
the Chaldaean crown. One of them, Shalmaneser I., wars in
the mountain-chain of Niphates, and plants cities in that region
(about B.C. 1270). This monarch also builds Calah (Nimrud),
forty miles north of Asshur, on the left or east bank of the river.

The Second Period is evidently that of which Herodotus
spoke as lasting for 520 years, from about B.C. 1260 to 740.
It commenced with the conquest of Babylon by Tiglathi-nin
(probably the original of the Greek " Ninus "), and it termi-
nated with the new dynasty established by Tiglath-pileser II.
The monuments furnish for the earlier portion of this period
some nine or ten discontinuous royal names, while for the
later portion they supply a complete consecutive list, and an
exact chronology. The exact chronology begins with the year
B.C. 909.

The great king of the earlier portion of the Second Period
is a certain Tiglath-pileser, who has left a long historical in-
scription, which shows that he carried his arms deep into
Mount Zagros on the one hand, and as far as Northern Syria

ANCIENT HISTORY 31

on the other. He Hkewise made an expedition into Babylonia.
Date, about B.C. 1 130. His son was also a warlike prince ; but
from about B.C. 1100 to 900 Assyrian history is still almost
a blank; and it is probable that we have here a period of
depression.

For the later portion of the Second Period — from B.C. 909
to 745 — the chronology is exact, and the materials for history
are abundant. In this period Calah became the capital, and
several of the palaces and temples were erected which have
been disinterred at Nimrud. The Assyrian monarchs carried
their arms beyond Zagros, and came into contact with Medes
and Persians ; they deeply penetrated Armenia ; and they
pressed from Northern into Southern Syria, and imposed their
yoke upon the Phoenicians, the kingdom of Damascus, and
the kingdom of Israel. The names of Ben-hadad, Hazael,
Ahab, and Jehu are common to the Assyrian and Hebrew
records. Towards the close of the period, the kings became
slothful and unwarlike, military expeditions ceased, or were
conducted only to short distances and against insignificant
enemies.

The Assyrian art of the Second shows a great advance upon
that of the First Period. Magnificent palaces were built,
richly embellished with bas-reliefs. Sculpture was rigid, but
bold and gjand. Literature was more cultivated. The history
of each reign was written by contemporary annalists, and cut
on stone, or impressed on cylinders of baked clay. Engraved
stelcp were erected in all the countries under Assyrian rule.
Considerable communication took place with foreign coun-
tries ; and Bactrian camels, baboons, curious antelopes, ele-
phants, and rhinoceroses were imported into Assyria from the
East.

In the Third Period the Assyrian Empire reached the height
of its greatness under the dynasty of the Sargonidae, after
which it fell suddenly, owing to blows received from two pow-
erful foes. The period commenced with a revival of the mili-
tary spirit and vigor of the nation under Tiglath-pileser II.,
the king of that name mentioned in Scripture. Distant expe-
ditions were resumed, and the arms of Assyria carried into
new regions. Egypt was attacked and reduced ; Susiana was

RAWLINSON

subjugated; and in Asia Minor Taurus was crossed, Cappa-
docia invaded, and relations established with the Lydian mon-
arch, Gyges. Naval expeditions were undertaken both in the
Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf, Cyprus submitted, and
the Assyrian monarchs numbered Greeks among their sub-
jects. Almost all the kings of the period came into contact
with the Jews, and the names of most of them appear in the
Hebrew records. Towards the close of th€ period the empire
sustained a severe shock from the sudden invasion of vast
hordes of Scythians from the North. Before it could recover
from the prostration caused by this attack, its old enemy,
Media, fell upon it, and, assisted by Babylon, effected its de-
struction.

Assyrian art attained to its greatest perfection during this
last period. Palaces were built by Tiglath-pileser II. at Calah,
by Sargon at Dur Sargina (Khorsabad), by Sennacherib at
Nineveh, by Esarhaddon at Calah and Nineveh, by Sardanap-
alus II. at Nineveh, and by Saracus at Calah. Glyptic art ad-
vanced, especially under Sardanapalus, when the animal forms
were executed with a naturalness and a spirit worthy of the
Greeks. At the same time carving in ivory, metallurgy, model-
ling, and other similar arts made much progress. An active
commerce united Assyria with Phoenicia, Egypt, and Greece.
Learning of various kinds — astronomic, geographic, linguis-
tic, historical — was pursued; and stores were accumulated
which will long exercise the ingenuity of the moderns.

MEDIAN MONARCHY.

The primitive history of the Medes is enveloped in great
obscurity. The mention of them as Madai in Genesis (x. 2),
and the statement of Berosus that they furnished an early dy-
nasty to Babylon, imply their importance in very ancient times.
But scarcely any thing is known of them till the ninth century
B.C., when they were attacked in their own proper country.
Media Magna, by the Assyrians (about B.C. 830). At this
time they were under the government of numerous petty chief-
tains, and offered but a weak resistance to the arms of the

ANCIENT HISTORY 53

Assyrian monarchs. No part of their country, however, was
reduced to subjection until the time of Sargon, who conquered
some Median territory about B.C. 710, and planted it with
cities in which he placed his Israelite captives. The subse-
quent Assyrian monarchs made further conquests; and it is
evident from their records that no gjeat Median monarchy had
arisen down to the middle of the seventh century B.C.

The earliest date which, with our present knowledge, we
can assign for the commencement of a great Median monarchy
is B.C. 650. The monarchs assigned by Herodotus and Ctesias
to a time anterior to this may conceivably have been chiefs
of petty Median tribes, but were certainly not the heads of the
whole nation. The probability is that they are fictitious per-
sonages. Suspicion attaches especially to the list of Ctesias,
which appears to have been formed by an intentional duplica-
tion of the regnal and other periods mentioned by Herodotus.

There is reason to believe that about B.C. 650, or a little
later, the Medes of Media Magna were largely reinforced by
fresh immigrants from the East, and that shortly afterwards
they were enabled to take an aggressive attitude towards As-
syria, such as had previously been quite beyond their power.
In B.C. 633 — according to Herodotus — they attacked Nineveh,
but were completely defeated, their leader, whom he calls
Phraortes, being slain in the battle. Soon after this occurred
the Scythian inroad, which threw the Medes upon the defen-
sive, and hindered them from resuming their schemes of con-
quest for several years. But, when this danger had passed,
they once more invaded the Assyrian Empire in force. Nine-
veh was invested and fell. Media upon this became the leading
power of Western Asia, but was not the sole power, since the
spoils of Assyria were divided between her and Babylon.

Less is known of Median art and civilization than of As-
syrian, Babylonian, or Persian. Their architecture appears
to have possessed a barbaric magnificence, but not much of
either grandeur or beauty. The great palace at Ecbatana
was of wood, plated with gold and silver. After the conquest
of Nineveh, luxurious habits were adopted from the Assyrians,
and the court of Astyages was probably as splendid as that
of Esarhaddon and Sardanapalus. The chief known peculiar-
3

RAWLINSON

ity of the Median kingdom was the ascendency exercised in
it by the Magi — a priestly caste claiming supernatural powers,
which had, apparently, been adopted into the nation.

BABYLONIAN MONARCHY.

After the conquest of Babylonia by the Assyrians, about
B.C. 1250, an Assyrian dynasty was established at Babylon,
and the country was, in general, content to hold a secondary
position in Western Asia, acknowledging the suzerainty of
the Ninevite kings. From time to time efforts were made to
shake off the yoke, but without much success till the accession
of Nabonassar, B.C. 747. Under Nabonassar and several of
his successors Babylonia appears to have been independent;
and this condition of independence continued, with intervals
of subjection, down to the accession of Esarhaddon, B.C. 680,
when Assyrian supremacy was once more established. Baby-
lon then continued in a subject position, till the time when
Nabopolassar made alliance with Cyaxares, joined in the last
siege of Nineveh, and, when Nineveh fell, became independent,
B.C. 625.

During the Second Period, Babylonia was not only an inde-
pendent kingdom, but was at the head of an empire. Nabo-
polassar and Cyaxares divided the Assyrian dominions be-
tween them, the former obtaining for his share Susiana, the
Euphrates valley, Syria, Phoenicia, and Palestine. A brilliant
period followed. At first indeed the new empire was threat-
ened by Egypt; and for a few years the western provinces
were actually held in subjection by Pharaoh-nechoh ; but
Babylon now aroused herself, defeated Nechoh, recovered her
territory, and carrying her arms through Palestine into Egypt,
chastised the aggressor on his own soil. From this time till
the invasion of Cyrus the empire continued to flourish, but
became gradually less and less warlike, and offered a poor
resistance to the Persians.

The architectural works of the Babylonians, more especially
under Nebuchadnezzar, were of surpassing grandeur. The
" hanging gardens " of that prince, and the walls with which
he surrounded Babylon, were reckoned among the Seven

ANCIENT HISTORY 35

Wonders of the World. The materials used were the same
as in the early Chaldaean times, sunburnt and baked brick;
but the baked now preponderated. The ornamentation of
buildings was by bricks of different hues, or sometimes by
a plating of precious metal, or by enamelling. By means of
the last-named process, war-scenes and hunting-scenes were
represented on the walls of palaces, which are said to have been
life-like and spirited. Temple-towers were still built in stages,
which now sometimes reached the number of seven. Useful
works of great magnitude were also constructed by some of
the kings, especially by Nebuchadnezzar and Nabonadius;
such as canals, reservoirs, embankments, sluices, and piers
on the shores of the Persian Gulf. Commerce flourished, and
Babylon was reckoned emphatically a " city of merchants."
The study of astronomy was also pursued with zeal and in-
dustry. Observations were made and carefully recorded. The
sky was mapped out into constellations, and the fixed stars
were catalogued. Occultations of the planets by the sun and
moon were noted. Time was accurately measured by means
of sun-dials, and other astronomical instruments were prob-
ably invented. At the same time it must be confessed that the
astronomical science of the Babylonians was not pure, but was
largely mixed with astrology, more especially in the later times.

KINGDOMS IN ASIA MINOR.

The geographical formation of Asia Minor, which separates
it into a number of distinct and isolated regions, was probably
the main reason why it did not in early times become the seat
of a great empire. The near equality of strength that existed
among several of the races by which it was inhabited — as the
Phrygians, the Lydians, the Carians, the Cilicians, the Paph-
lagonians, and the Cappadocians — would tend naturally in the
same direction, and lead to the formation of several parallel
kingdoms instead of a single and all-embracing one. Never-
theless, ultimately, such a g^reat kingdom did grow up; but
it had only just been formed when it was subverted by one
more powerful.

RAWLINSON

The most powerful state in the early times seems to have
been Phrygia. It had an extensive and fertile territory, espe-
cially suited for pasturage, and was also rich in the possession
of salt lakes, which largely furnished that necessary of life.
The people were brave, but somewhat brutal. They had a
lively and martial music. It is probable that they were at no
time all united into a single community ; but there is no reason
to doubt that a considerable monarchy grew up in the north-
western portion of the country, about B.C. 750 or earlier. The
capital of the kingdom was Gordiseum on the Sangarius. The
monarchs bore alternately the two names of Gordias and
Midas. As many as four of each name have been distinguished
by some critics; but the dates of the reigns are uncertain.
A Midas appears to have been contemporary with Alyattes
(about B.C. 600 to 570), and a Gordias with Croesus (B.C. 570
to 560). Phrygia was conquered and became a province of
Lydia about B.C. 560.

Cilicia was likewise the seat of a monarchy in times anterior
to Cyrus. About B.C. 711 Sargon gave the country to Am-
bris, king of Tubal, as a dowry with his daughter. Senna-
cherib, about B.C. 701, and Esarhaddon, about B.C. (yjy, in-
vaded and ravaged the region. Tarsus was founded by Senna-
cherib, about B.C. 685. In B.C. 666 Sardanapalus took to
wife a Cilician princess. Fifty years afterwards we find a Syen-
nesis seated on the throne, and from this time all the kings
appear to have borne that name or title. Cilicia maintained
her independence against Croesus, and (probably) against Cy-
rus, but submitted to Persia soon afterwards, probably in the
reign of Cambyses.

Ultimately the most important of all the kingdoms of Asia
Minor was Lydia. According to the accounts which Herodo-
tus followed, a Lydian kingdom had existed from very ancient
times, monarchs to whom he gives the name of Manes, Atys,
Lydus, and Meles, having borne sway in Lydia prior to B.C.
1229. This dynasty, which has been called Atyadae, was fol-
lowed by one of Heraclidae, which continued in power for 505
years — from B.C. 1229 to 724. (The last six kings of this
dynasty are known from Nicholas of Damascus who follows
Xanthus, the native writer. They were Adyattes I., Ardys,

ANCIENT HISTORY 37

Adyattes II., Meles, Myrsus, and Sadyattes or Candaules.)
On the murder of Candaules, B.C. 724, a third dynasty — that
of the Mermnadae — bore rule. This continued till B.C. 554,
when the last Lydian monarch, Croesus, was conquered by
Cyrus. This monarch had previously succeeded in changfing
his kingdom into an empire, having extended his dominion
over all Asia Minor, excepting Lycia, Cilicia, and Cappadocia.

PHCENICIA.

Phoenicia, notwithstanding the small extent of its territory,
which consisted of a mere strip of land between the crest of
Lebanon and the sea, was one of the most important countries
of the ancient world. In her the commercial spirit first showed
itself as the dominant spirit of a nation. She was the carrier
between the East and the West — the link that bound them
together — in times anterior to the first appearance of the
Greeks as navigfators. No complete history of Phoenicia has
come down to us, nor can a continuous history be constructed ;
but some important fragments remain, and the general con-
dition of the country, alternating between subjection and in-
dependence, is ascertained sufficiently.

At no time did Phoenicia form either a single centralized
state, or even an organized confederacy. Under ordinary cir-
cumstances the states were separate and independent: only
in times of danger did they occasionally unite under the leader-
ship of the most powerful. The chief cities were Tyre, Sidon,
Berytus, Byblus, Tripolis, and Aradus. Of these Sidon seems
to have been the most ancient ; and there is reason to believe
that, prior to about B.C. 1050, she was the most flourishing of
all the Phoenician communities.

The priority and precedency enjoyed by Sidon in the remoter
times devolved upon Tyre (her colony, according to some)
about B.C. 1050. The defeat of Sidon by the Philistines of
Ascalon is said to have caused the transfer of power. Tyre,
and indeed every Phoenician city, was under the rule of kings ;
but the priestly order had considerable influence; and an
aristocracy of birth, or wealth, likewise restrained any tyran-

38 RAWLINSON

nical inclinations on the part of the monarch. The list of the
Tyrian kings from about B.C. 1050 to 830 is known to us
from the fragments of Menander.

The commercial spirit of Phoenicia was largely displayed
during this period, which, till towards its close, was one of
absolute independence. The great monarchies of Egypt and
Assyria were now, comparatively speaking, weak; and the
states between the Euphrates and the African border, being
free from external control, were able to pursue their natural
bent without interference. Her commercial leanings early in-
duced Phoenicia to begin the practice of establishing colonies ;
and the advantages which the system was found to secure
caused it to acquire speedily a vast development. The coasts
and islands of the Mediterranean were rapidly covered with
settlements; the Pillars of Hercules were passed, and cities
built on the shores of the ocean. At the same time factories
were established in the Persian Gulf ; and, conjointly with the
Jews, on the Red Sea. Phoenicia had at this time no serious
commercial rival, and the trade of the world was in her hands.

The geographical position of the Phoenician colonies marks
the chief lines of their trade, but is far from indicating its full
extent ; since the most distant of these settlements served as
starting-points whence voyages were made to remoter regions.
Phoenician merchantmen proceeding from Gades and Tartes-
sus explored the western coast of Africa, and obtained tin from
Cornwall and the Scilly Islands. The traders of Tylus and
Aradus extended their voyages beyond the Persian Gulf to
India and Taprobane, or Ceylon. Phoenician navigators, start-
ing from Elath in the Red Sea, procured gold from Ophir, on
the south-eastern coast of Arabia. Thasos and the neighbor-
ing islands furnished convenient stations from which the
Euxine could be visited and commercial relations established
with Thrace, Scythia, and Colchis. Some have supposed that
the North Sea was crossed and the Baltic entered in quest of
amber; but the balance of evidence is, on the whole, against
this extreme hypothesis.

The sea-trade of the Phoenicians was probably supplemented
from a very remote date by a land traffic; but this portion
of their commerce scarcely obtained its full development till

ANCIENT HISTORY 39

the time of Nebuchadnezzar. A line of communication must
indeed have been established early with the Persian Gulf set-
tlements; and in the time of Solomon there was no doubt
a route open to Phoenician traders from Tyre or Joppa, through
Jerusalem, to Elath. But the generally disturbed state of
Western Asia during the Assyrian period would have rendered
land traffic then so insecure, that, excepting where it was a
necessity, it would have been avoided.

Towards the close of the period, whereof the history has
been sketched above, the military expeditions of the Assyr-
ians began to reach Southern Syria, and Phoenician inde-
pendence seems to have been lost. We can not be sure
that the submission was continuous; but from the middle of
the ninth till past the middle of the eighth century there occur
in the contemporary monuments of Assyria plain indications
of Phoenician subjection, while there is no evidence of resist-
ance or revolt. Native sovereigns tributary to Assyria reign
in the Phoenician towns and are reckoned by the Assyrian
monarchs among their dependents. The country ceases to
have a history of its own ; and, with one exception, the very
names of its rulers have perished.

About B.C. 743 the passive submission of Phoenicia to the
Assyrian yoke began to be exchanged for an impatience of it,
and frequent eflforts were made, from this date till Nineveh fell,
to re-establish Phoenician independence. These efforts for the
most part failed; but it is not improbable that finally, amid
the troubles under which the Assyrian empire succumbed, suc-
cess crowned the nation's patriotic exertions, and autonomy
was recovered.

Scarcely, however, had Assyria fallen, when a new enemy
appeared upon the scene. Nechoh of Eg^pt, about B.C. 608,
conquered the whole tract between his own borders and the
Euphrates. Phoenicia submitted or was reduced, and remained
for three years an Egyptian dependency.

Nebuchadnezzar, in B.C. 605, after his defeat of Nechoh at
Carchemish, added Phoenicia to Babylon ; and, though Tyre
revolted from him eight years later, B.C. 598, and resisted for
thirteen years all his attempts to reduce her, yet at length she
was compelled to submit, and the Babylonian yoke was firmly

40 RAWLINSON

fixed on the entire Phoenician people. It is not quite certain
that they did not shake it off upon the death of the great Baby-
lonian king- ; but, on the whole, probability is in favor of their
having remained subject till the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus,
B.C. 538. As usual, the internal government of the depend-
ency was left to the conquered people, who were ruled at this
time either by native kings, or, occasionally, by judges.

As Greece rose to power, and as Carthage increased in im-
portance, the sea-trade of Phoenicia was to a certain extent
checked. The commerce of the Euxine and the .^gean
passed almost wholly into the hands of the alien Hellenes;
that of the Western Mediterranean and the Atlantic Ocean
had to be shared with the daughter state. Meanwhile, however,
in consequence of the more settled condition of Western Asia,
first under the later Assyrian, and then under the Babylonian
monarchs, the land trade received a considerable development.
A line of traffic was established with Armenia and Cappa-
docia, and Phoenician manufactures were exchanged for the
horses, mules, slaves, and brazen or copper utensils of those
regions. Another line passed by Tadmor, or Palmyra, to
Thapsacus, whence it branched on the one hand through Up-
per Mesopotamia to Assyria, on the other down the Euphrates
valley to Babylon and the Persian Gulf. Whether a third
line traversed the Arabian peninsula from end to end for the
sake of the Yemen spices may be doubted ; but, at any rate,
communication must have been kept up by land with the
friendly Jerusalem, and with the Red Sea, which was certainly
frequented by Phoenician fleets.

The Phoenician commerce was chiefly a carrying trade ; but
there were also a few productions of their own in which their
traffic was considerable. The most famous of these was the
purple dye, which they obtained from two shell-fish, the buc-
cinum and the murex, and by the use of which they gave a
high value to their textile fabrics. Another was glass, whereof
they claimed the discovery, and which they manufactured into
various articles of use and ornament. They were also skilful
in metallurgy ; and their bronzes, their gold and silver vessels,
and other works in metal, had a high repute. Altogether, they
have a claim to be considered one of the most ingenious of the

ANCIENT HISTORY 41

nations of antiquity, though we must not ascribe to them the
invention of letters or the possession of any remarkable artistic
talent.

SYRIA.

Syria, prior to its formation into a Persian satrapy, had at
no time any political unity. During the Assyrian period it was
divided into at least five principal states, some of which were
mere loose confederacies. The five states were — i. The north-
em Hittites. Chief city, Carchemish (probably identical with
the later Mabog, now Bambuch). 2. The Patena, on the lower
Orontes. Chief city, Kinalua. 3. The people of Hamath, in
the Coele-Syrian valley, on the upper Orontes. Chief city,
Hamath (now Hamah). 4. The southern Hittites, in the tract
south of Hamath. 5. The Syrians of Damascus, in the Anti-
Libanus, and the fertile country between that range and the
desert. Chief city, Damascus, on the Abana (Barada).

Of these states the one which was, if not the most powerful,
yet at any rate the most generally known, was Syria of Damas-
cus. The city itself was as old as the time of Abraham. The
state, which was powerful enough, about B.C. 1000, to escape
absorption into the empire of Solomon, continued to enjoy
independence down to the time of Tiglath-pileser H., and was
a formidable neighbor to the Jewish and Israelite monarchs.
After the capture by Tiglath-pileser, about B.C. 732, a time
of great weakness and depression ensued. One or two feeble
attempts at revolt were easily crushed ; after which, for a while,
Damascus wholly disappears from history.

jud;ea.

The history of the Jews and Israelites is known to us in com-
pleter sequence and in greater detail than that of any other
people of equal antiquity, from the circumstance that there has
been preserved to our day so large a portion of their literature.
The Jews became familiar with writing during their sojourn
in Egypt, if not even earlier; and kept records of the chief
events in their national life from that time almost uninterrupt-
edly. From the sacred character which attached to many of

42 RAWLINSON

their historical books, peculiar care was taken of them ; and
the result is that they have come down to us nearly in their
original form. Besides this, a large body of their ancient poesy
is still extant, and thus it becomes possible to describe at length
not merely the events of their civil history, but their manners,
customs, and modes of thought.

The history of the Jewish state commences with the Exodus,
which is variously dated, at B.C. 1652 (Poole), B.C. 1491
(Ussher), or B.C. 1320 (Bunsen, Lepsius). The long chronol-
ogy is, on the whole, to be preferred. We may conveniently
divide the history into three periods.

Periods. B.C.

I. From the Exodus to the establishment of the monarchy 1650-1095
II. From the establishment of the monarchy to the sep-
aration into two kingdoms 1095-975

III. From the separation of the kingdoms to the captivity

under Nebuchadnezzar 975-586

During the First Period the Jews regarded themselves as
under a theocracy ; or, in other words, the policy of the nation
was directed in all difficult crises by a reference to the Divine
will, which there was a recognized mode of consulting. The
earthly ruler, or rather leader, of the nation did not aspire to
the name or position of king, but was content to lead the nation
in war and judge it in peace from a position but a little elevated
above that of the mass of the people. He obtained his office
neither by hereditary descent nor by election, but was super-
naturally designated to it by revelation to himself or to an-
other, and exercised it with the general consent, having no
means of compelling obedience. When once his authority was
acknowledged, he retained it during the remainder of his life ;
but it did not always extend over the whole nation. When
he died, he was not always succeeded immediately by another
similar ruler: on the contrary, there was often a considerable
interval during which the nation had either no head, or ac-
knowledged subjection to a foreign conqueror. When there
was no head, the hereditary chiefs of tribes and families seem
to have exercised jurisdiction and authority over the different
districts.

ANCIENT HISTORY 43

The chronology of this period is exceedingly uncertain, as
is evident from the different dates assigned above to the
Exodus. The Jews had different traditions upon the sub-
ject ; and the chronological notices in their sacred books were
neither complete, nor, apparently, intended for exact state-
ments. The numbers, therefore, in the subjoined sketch must
be regarded as merely approximate.

The Second Period of the Jewish state comprises three reigns
only — those of Saul, David, and Solomon. Each of these was
regarded as having lasted exactly forty years ; and thus the
entire duration of the single monarchy was reckoned at 120
years. The progress of the nation during this brief space is
most remarkable. When Saul ascends the throne the condi-
tion of the people is but little advanced beyond the point which
was reached when the tribes under Joshua took possession of
the Promised Land. Pastoral and agricultural occupations
still engross the attention of the Israelites ; simple habits pre-
vail ; there is no wealthy class ; the monarch, like the Judges,
has no court, no palace, no extraordinary retinue ; he is still
little more than leader in war, and chief judge in time of peace.
Again, externally, the nation is as weak as ever. The Ammo-
nites on the one side, and the Philistines on the other, ravage
its territory at their pleasure ; and the latter people have en-
croached largely upon the Israelite borders, and reduced the
Israelites to such a point of depression that they have no arms,
oflFensive or defensive, nor even any workers in iron. Under
Solomon, on the contrary, within a century of this time of
weakness, the Israelites have become the paramount race in
Syria. An empire has been formed which reaches from the
Euphrates at Thapsacus to the Red Sea and the borders of
Egypt. Numerous monarchs are tributary to the Great King
who reigns at Jerusalem ; vast sums in gold and silver flow
into the treasury ; magnificent edifices are constructed ; trade
is established both with the East and with the West ; the court
of Jerusalem vies in splendor with those of Nineveh and Mem-
phis ; luxury has invaded the country : a seraglio on the largest
scale has been formed ; and the power and greatness of the
prince has become oppressive to the bulk of the people. Such
a rapid growth was necessarily exhaustive of the nation's

44 RAWLINSON

strength; and the decline of the Israelites as a people dates
from the division of the kingdom.

Saul, divinely pointed out to Samuel, is anointed by him,
and afterwards accepted by the people upon the casting of lots.
He is remarkable for his comeliness and lofty stature. In his
first year he defeats the Ammonites, who had overrun the land
of Gilead. He then makes war on the Philistines, and gains
the great victory of Michmash; from which time till near the
close of his reign the Philistines remain upon the defensive.
He also attacks the Amalekites, the Moabites, the Edomites,
and the Syrians of Zobah. In the Amalekite war he offends
God by disobedience, and thereby forfeits his right to the king-
dom. Samuel, by divine command, anoints David, who is
thenceforth an object of jealousy and hatred to the reigning
monarch, but is protected by Jonathan, his son. Towards the
close of Saul's reign the Philistines once more assume the of-
fensive, under Achish, king of Oath, and at Mount Gilboa
defeat the Israelites under Saul. Saul, and all his sons but one
(Ishbosheth), fall in the battle.

A temporary division of the kingdom follows the death of
Saul. Ishbosheth, conveyed across the Jordan by Abner, is
acknowledged as ruler in Gilead, and after five years, during
which his authority is extended over all the tribes except
Judah, is formally crowned as King of Israel at Mahanaim.
He reigns there two years, when he is murdered. Meanwhile
David is made king by his own tribe, Judah, and reigns at
Hebron.

On the death of Ishbosheth, David became king of the whole
nation. His first act was the capture of Jerusalem, which up
to this time had remained in the possession of the Jebusites.
Having taken it, he made it the seat of government, built him-
self a palace there, and, by removing to it the Ark of the Cove-
nant, constituted it the national sanctuary. At the same time
a court was formed at the new capital, a moderate seraglio
set up, and a royal state affected unknown hitherto in Israel.

A vast aggrandizement of the state by means of foreign con-
quests followed. The Philistines were chastised, Gath taken,
and the Israelite dominions in this quarter pushed as far as
Gaza. Moab was invaded, two-thirds of the inhabitants ex-

ANCIENT HISTORY 45

terminated, and the remainder forced to pay an annual tribute
to the conqueror. War followed with Ammon, and with the
various Syrian states interposed between the Holy Land and
the Euphrates. At least three g^eat battles were fought, with
the result that the entire tract between the Jordan and the Eu-
phrates was added to the Israelite territory. A campaign re-
duced Edom, and extended the kingdom to the Red Sea. An
empire was thus formed, which proved indeed short-lived, but
was as real while it lasted as those of Assyria or Babylon.

Tlie glories of David's reign were tarnished by two re-
bellions. The fatal taint of polygamy, introduced by David
into the nation, gave occasion to these calamities, which arose
from the mutual jealousies of his sons. First Absalom, and
then Adonijah, assume the royal title in their father's lifetime ;
and pay for treason, the one immediately, the other ultimately,
with their lives. After the second rebellion, David secures
the succession to Solomon by associating him upon the throne.

The reign of Solomon is the culminating point of Jewish
history. Resistance on the part of the conquered states has,
with scarcely an exception, now ceased, and the new king can
afford to be " a man of peace." The position of his kingdom
among the nations of the earth is acknowledged by the neigh-
boring powers, and the reigning Pharaoh does not scruple to
g^ve him his daughter in marriage. A great commercial move-
ment follows. By alliance with Hiram of Tyre, Solomon is
admitted to a share in the profits of Phoenician traffic, and the
vast influx of the precious metals into Palestine which results
from this arrangement enables the Jewish monarch to indulge
freely his taste for ostentation and display. The court is recon-
structed on an increased scale. A new palace of enlarged di-
mensions and far greater architectural magnificence super-
sedes the palace of David. The seraglio is augmented, and
reaches a point which has no known parallel. A throne of
extraordinary grandeur proclaims in language intelligible to
all the wealth and greatness of the empire. Above all, a sanct-
uary for the national worship is constructed on the rock of
Moriah, on which all the mechanical and artistic resources of
the time are lavished; and the Ark of the Covenant, whose
wanderings have hitherto marked the unsettled and insecure

46 RAWLINSON

condition of the nation, obtains at length a fixed and perma-
nent resting-place.

But close upon the heels of success and glory follows decline.
The trade of Solomon — a State monopoly — enriched himself
but not his subjects. The taxes which he imposed on the prov-
inces for the sustentation of his enormous court exhausted and
impoverished them. His employment of vast masses of the
people in forced labors of an unproductive character was a
wrongful and uneconomical interference with industry, which
crippled agriculture and aroused a strong feeling of discontent.
Local jealousies were provoked by the excessive exaltation of
the tribe of Judah. The enervating influence of luxury began
to be felt. Finally, a subtle corruption was allowed to spread
itself through all ranks by the encouragement given to false
religions, religions whose licentious and cruel rites were sub-
versive of the first principles of morality, and even of decency.
The seeds of the disintegration which showed itself imme-
diately upon the death of Solomon were sown during his life-
time ; and it is only surprising that they did not come to light
earlier and interfere more seriously with the prosperity of his
long reign.

On the death of Solomon, the disintegrating forces, already
threatening the unity of the empire, received, through the folly
of his successor, a sudden accession of strength, which pre-
cipitated the catastrophe. Rehoboam, entreated to lighten the
burdens of the Israelites, declared his intention of increasing
their weight, and thus drove the bulk of his native subjects
into rebellion. The disunion of the conquering people gave
the conquered tribes an opportunity of throwing off the yoke,
whereof with few exceptions they availed themselves. In lieu
of the puissant State, which under David and Solomon took
rank among the foremost powers of the earth, we have hence-
forth to deal with two petty kingdoms of small account, the
interest of whose history is religious rather than political.

The kingdom of Israel, established by the revolt of Jero-
boam, comprises ten out of the twelve tribes, and reaches from
the borders of Damascus and Hamath to within ten miles of
Jerusalem. It includes the whole of the trans-Jordanic terri-
tory, and exercises lordship over the adjoining country of

ANCIENT HISTORY 47

Moab. The proportion of its population to that of Judah
in the early times may be estimated as two to one. But the
advantage of superior size, fertility, and population is counter-
balanced by the inferiority of every Israelite capital to Jerusa-
lem, and by the fundamental weakness of a government which,
deserting purity of religion, adopts for expediency's sake an
unauthorized and semi-idolatrous worship. In vain a succes-
sion of Prophets, some of them endowed with extraordinary
miraculous power, struggled against this fatal taint. Idolatry,
intertwined with the nation's life, could not be rooted out.
One form of the evil led on to other and worse forms. The
national strength was sapped; and it scarcely required an
attack from without to bring the State to dissolution. The
actual fall, however, is produced B.C. 721, by the growing
power of Assyria, which has even at an earlier date forced some
of the monarchs to pay tribute.

The separate kingdom of Judah, commencing at the same
date with that of Israel, outlasted it by considerably more than
a century. Composed of two entire tribes only, with refugees
from the remainder, and confined to the lower and less fertile
portion of the Holy Land, it compensated for these disadvan-
tages by its compactness, its unity, the strong position of its
capital, and the indomitable spirit of its inhabitants, who felt
themselves the real " people of God," the true inheritors of the
marvellous past, and the only rightful claimants of the greater
marvels promised in the future. Surrounded as it was by
petty enemies, Philistines, Arabians, Ammonites, Israelites,
Syrians, and placed in the pathway between two mighty pow-
ers, Assyria and Egypt, its existence was continually threat-
ened ; but the valor of its people and the protection of Divine
Providence preserved it intact during a space of nearly four
centuries. In striking contrast with the sister kingdom of the
North, it preserved during this long space, almost without a
break, the hereditary succession of its kings, who followed one
another in the direct line of descent, as long as there was no
foreign intervention. Its elasticity in recovering from defeat
is most remarkable. Though forced repeatedly to make ig-
nominious terms of peace, though condemned to see on three
occasions its capital in the occupation of an enemy, it rises

48 RAWLINSON

from disaster with its strength seemingly unimpaired, defies
Assyria in one reign, confronts Egypt in another, and is only
crushed at last by the employment against it of the full force
of the Babylonian empire.

PART II.-AFRICAN NATIONS.

PRELIMINARY REMARKS ON THE GEOGRAPHY
OF ANCIENT AFRICA.

The continent of Africa offers a remarkable contrast to that
of Asia in every important physical characteristic. Asia ex-
tends itself through all three zones, the torrid, the frigid, and
the temperate, and lies mainly in the last, or most favored of
them. Africa belongs almost entirely to the torrid zone, ex-
tending only a little way north and south into those portions
of the two temperate zones which lie nearest to the tropics.
Asia has a coast deeply indented with numerous bays and
gulfs ; Africa has but one considerable indentation — the Gulf
of Guinea on its western side. Asia, again, is traversed by fre-
quent and lofty mountain chains, the sources from which flow
numerous rivers of first-rate magnitude. Africa has but two
g^eat rivers, the Nile and the Niger, and is deficient in moun-
tains of high elevation. Finally, Asia possesses numerous lit-
toral islands of a large size ; Africa has but one such island,
Madagascar; and even the islets which lie off its coast are,
comparatively speaking, few.

Its equatorial position, its low elevation, and its want of im-
portant rivers, render Africa the hottest, the dryest, and the
most infertile of the four continents. In the north a sea of
sand, known as the Sahara, stretches from east to west across
the entire continent from the Atlantic to the Red Sea, and
occupies fully one-fifth of its surface. Smaller tracts of an
almost equally arid character occur towards the south. Much
of the interior consists of swampy jungle, impervious, and fatal
to human life. The physical characteristics of the continent
render it generally unapt for civilization or for the growth of
great states: it is only in a few regions that Nature wears
a more benignant aspect, and offers conditions favorable to
human progress. These regions are chiefly in the north and
4 49

50 RAWLINSON

the north-east, in the near vicinity of the Mediterranean and
the Red Sea.

It was only the more northern part of Africa that was known
to the ancients, or that had any direct bearing on the history
of the ancient world. Here the geographical features were
very marked and striking. First, there lay close along the
sea-shore a narrow strip of generally fertile territory, watered
by streams which emptied themselves into the Mediterranean.
South of this was a tract of rocky mountain, less fitted for
human habitation, though in places producing abundance of
dates. Thirdly, came the Great Desert, interspersed with
oases — islands in the sea of sand containing springs of water
and a flourishing vegetation. Below the Sahara, and com-
pletely separated by it from any political contact with the coun-
tries of the north, but crossed occasionally by caravans for
purposes of commerce, was a second fertile region — a land
of large rivers and lakes, where there were cities and a numer-
ous population.

The western portion of North Africa stood, in some respects,
in marked contrast with the eastern. Towards the east the
fertile coast-tract is in general exceedingly narrow, and spar-
ingly watered by a small number of insignificant streams. The
range of bare rocky hills from which they flow — the continua-
tion of Atlas — is of low elevation ; and the Great Desert often
approaches within a very short distance of the coast. Towards
the west the lofty range of Atlas, running at a considerable
distance (200 miles) from the shore, allows a broad tract of
fertile ground to intervene between its crest and the sea. The
range itself is well wooded, and gives birth to many rivers of
a fair size. Here states of importance may grow up, for the
resources of the tract are great ; the soil is good ; the climate
not insalubrious ; but towards the east Nature has been a
niggard; and, from long. 10° E. nearly to long. 30°, there
is not a single position where even a second-rate state could
long maintain itself.

The description of North Africa, which has been here given,
holds good as far as long. 30° ; but east of this line there com-
mences another and very different region. From the high-
lands of Abyssinia and the g^eat reservoirs on the line of the

ANCIENT HISTORY 51

equator, the Nile rolls down its vast body of waters with a
course whose general direction is from south to north, and,
meeting the Desert, flows across it in a mighty stream, which
renders this corner of the continent the richest and most valu-
able of all the tracts contained in it. The Nile valley is 3000
miles long, and, in its upper portion, of unknown width. When
it enters the Desert, about lat. 16°, its width contracts; and
from the sixth cataract down to Cairo, the average breadth of
the cultivable soil does not exceed fifteen miles. This soil,
however, is of the best possible quality; and the possession
of the strip on either side of the river, and of the broader tract
known as the Delta, about its mouth, naturally constitutes
the power which holds it a great and important state. The
proximity of this part of Africa to Western Asia and to Europe,
its healthiness and comparatively temperate climate, likewise
favored the development in this region of an early civilization
and the formation of a monarchy which played an important
part in the history of the ancient world.

Above the point at which the Nile enters the Desert, on the
right or east bank of the stream, occurs another tract, physi-
cally very remarkable, and capable of becoming politically of
high consideration. Here there is interposed between the main
stream of the Nile and the Red Sea an elevated table-land, 8000
feet above the ocean-level, surrounded and intersected by
mountains, which rise in places to the height of 15,000 feet.
These lofty masses attract and condense the vapors that float
in from the neighboring sea ; and the country is thus subject
to violent rains, which during the summer months fill the river-
courses, and, flowing down them to the Nile, are the cause of
that stream's periodical overflow, and so of the rich fertility
of Egypt. The abundance of moisture renders the plateau
generally productive ; and the region, which may be regarded
as containing from 200,000 to 250,000 square miles, is thus
one well capable of nourishing and sustaining a power of the
first magnitude.

The nations inhabiting Northern Africa in the times an-
terior to Cyrus were, according to the belief of the Greeks,
five. These were the Egfvptians, the Ethiopians, the Greeks,
the Phoenicians, and the Libyans.

RAWLINSON

EGYPT.

To the Egyptians belonged the Nile valley from lat. 24" to
the coast, together with the barren region between that valley
and the Red Sea, and the fertile tract of the Faioom about
Moeris, on the opposite side of the stream. Its most important
portion was the Delta, which contained about 8000 square
miles, and was studded with cities of note. The chief towns
were, however, in the narrow valley. These were Memphis,
not much above the apex of the Delta, and Thebes, about lat.
26°. Besides these, the places of importance were, in Upper
Egypt, Elephantine and Chemmis, or Panopolis ; in the lower
country, Heliopolis, Sais, Sebennytus, Mendes, Tanis, Bubas-
tis, and Pelusium. The Nile was the only Egyptian river ; but
at the distance of about ninety miles from the sea, the great
stream divided itself into three distinct channels, known as the
Canobic, the Sebennytic, and the Pelusiac branches, while,
lower down, these channels further subdivided themselves, so
that in the time of Herodotus the Nile waters reached the
Mediterranean by seven distinct mouths. Egypt had one large
and several smaller lakes. The large lake, known by the name
of Moeris, lay on the west side of the Nile, in lat. 29° 50'.
It was believed to be artificial, but was really a natural de-
pression.

ETHIOPIA.

The Ethiopians held the valley of the Nile above Egypt, and
the whole of the plateau from which descend the great Nile
affluents, the modern country of Abyssinia. Their chief city
was Meroe. Little was known of the tract by the ancients;
but it was believed to be excessively rich in gold. A tribe
called Troglodyte Ethiopians — i. e., Ethiopians who burrowed
underground — is mentioned as inhabiting the Sahara where
it adjoins upon Fezzan.

ANCIENT HISTORY 53

GREEK SETTLEMENTS.

The Greeks had colonized the portion of North Africa which
approached most nearly to the Peloponnese, having settled at
Cyrene about B. C. 630, and at Barca about seventy years after-
wards. They had also a colony at Naucratis in Egypt, and
perhaps a settlement at the greater Oasis.

LIBYANS.

The Libyans possessed the greater part of Northern Africa,
extending, as they did, from the borders of Eg^pt to the At-
lantic Ocean, and from the Mediterranean to the Great Desert.
They were divided into a number of tribes, among which the
following were the most remarkable: the Adyrmachidae, who
bordered on Egypt, the Nasamonians on the greater Syrtis,
the Garamantes in the modem Fezzan, and the Atlantes in
the range of Atlas. Most of these races were nomadic ; but
some of the more western cultivated the soil, and, consequently,
had fixed abodes. Politically, all these tribes were excessively
weak.

CARTHAGE.

The Carthaginians, or Liby-Phcenicians — immigrants into
Africa, like the Greeks — had fixed themselves in the fertile
region north of the Atlas chain, at the point where it approaches
nearest to Sicily. Here in a cluster lay the important towns
of Carthage, Utica, Hippo Zaritus, Tunis, and Zama Regia,
while a little removed were Adrumetum, Leptis, and Hippo
Regius. The entire tract was fertile and well watered, inter-
sected by numerous ranges, spurs from the main chain of
Atlas. Its principal river was the Bagrada (now Majerdah),
which emptied itself into the sea a little to the north-west of
Carthage. The entire coast was indented by numerous bays ;
and excellent land-locked harbors were formed by salt lakes
connected with the sea by narrow channels. Such was the
Hipponites Palus (L. Benzart) near Hippo Zaritus, and the
great harbor of Carthage, now that of Tunis. Next to the

54 RAWLINSON

Nile valley, this was the portion of Northern Africa most fa-
vored by Nature, and best suited for the habitation of a great
power.

The early estabUshment of monarchical government in
Egypt is indicated in Scripture by the mention of a Pharaoh
as contemporary with Abraham, The full account which is
given of the general character of the kingdom administered
by Joseph suggests as the era of its foundation a date consid-
erably more ancient than that of Abraham's visit. The priests
themselves claimed for the monarchy, in the time of Herodo-
tus, an antiquity of above ii,ooo years. Manetho, writing
after the reduction of his country by the Macedonians, was
more moderate, assigning to the thirty dynasties which, ac-
cording to him, preceded the Macedonian conquest, a number
of years amounting in the aggregate to rather more than 5000,
The several items which produce this amount may be correct,
or nearly so; but, if their sum is assumed as measuring the
duration of the monarchy, the calculation will be largely in
excess; for the Egyptian monuments show that Manetho's
dynasties were often reigning at the same time in different
parts of the country. The difficulty of determining the true
chronology of early Egypt arises from an uncertainty as to
the extent to which Manetho's dynasties were contemporary.
The monuments prove a certain amount -of contemporaneity.
But it is unreasonable to suppose that they exhaust the subject,
or do more than indicate a practice the extent of which must
be determined, partly by examination of our documents, partly
by reasonable conjecture.

A careful examination of the names and numbers in Mane-
tho's lists, and a laborious investigation of the monuments,
have led the best English Egyptologers to construct, or adopt,
the subjoined scheme, as that which best expresses the real
position in which Manetho's first seventeen dynasties stood
to one another.

It will be seen that, according to this scheme, there were
in Egypt during the early period, at one time two, at another
three, at another five or even six, parallel or contemporaneous
kingdoms, established in different parts of the country. For
example, while the first and second dynasties of Manetho were

ANCIENT HISTORY

Abonc
•TOO

•900

1900

1800

1700
1600

Drnasty,
Iniiiite.

Dynas^,
Memphitc

*d
Dynasty,
Thiniie.

4th

5th

Memphitc. eJephan-

6th
Dynasty,
Mempbiie.

TthandSth
Dynasties,
Memphitc

9th

nth

Dynasty, | Dvnasty,
Herade- ToebaiH.

opoliie.

lath 14th

Ehmasty, Dywuty,
Tnebaiu. Xoitea.

loth
Ehmasty,
Heracle-
opotile.

13th
Dvnasty,
Thebans.

tsth I i6ih
Dynasty, | Dynasty,
Shepherds. Sbepberas.

ruling at This, his third, fourth, and sixth bore sway at Mem-
phis ; and, during a portion of this time, his fifth dynasty was
ruHng at Elephantine, his ninth at Heracleopolis, and his elev-
enth at Thebes or Diospolis. And the same general condition
of things prevailed till near the close of the sixteenth century
B.C., when Egypt was, probably for the first time, united into
a single kingdom, ruled from the one centre, Thebes.

It is doubtful how far the names and numbers in Mane-
tho's first and third dynasties are historical. The correspond-
ence of the name, Menes (M'na), with that of other traditional
founders of nations, or first men — with the Manes of Lydia,
the Phrygian Manis, the Cretan Minos, the Indian Menu, the
German Mannus, and the like — raises a suspicion that here too
we are dealing with a fictitious personage, an ideal and not

RAWLINSON

a real founder. The improbably long reign assigned to M'na
(sixty or sixty-two years), and his strange death — he is said
to have been killed by a hippopotamus — increase the doubt
which the name causes. M'na's son and successor, Athothis
(Thoth), the Egyptian .^^sculapius, seems to be equally myth-
ical. The other names are such as may have been borne by
real kings, and it is possible that in Manetho's time they existed
on monuments ; but the chronology, which, in the case of the
first dynasty, gives an average of thirty-two or thirty-three
years to a reign, is evidently in excess, and can not be trusted.

First Dynasty (Thinite).

Kings.

1. Menes

2. Athothis (his son) . , .

3. Kenkenes (his son). .

4. Uenephes (his son) .

5. Usaphaedus (his son)

6. Miebidus (his son) . .

7. Semempses (his son).

8. Bieneches (his son) , .

Years.

Euseb. Afric.

60
27

39
42
20
26
18
26

258

62
57
31
23
20
26
18
26

263

Third Dynasty (Memphite).

Kings.

1. Necherophes

2. Tosorthrus..

3. Tyreis

4. Mesochris . .

5. Suphis

6. Tosertasis . .

7. Aches

8. Sephuris. . . .

9. Kerpheres . .

Years.

Euseb. Afric,

298

28
29

17
16

19
42
30
26

214

With Manetho's second and fourth dynasties we reach the
time of contemporary monuments, and feel ourselves on sure
historical ground. The tomb of Koeechus (Ke-ke-ou), the
second king of the second dynasty, has been found near the
pyramids of Gizeh; and Soris (Shure), Suphis I. (Shufu),
Suphis II. (Nou-shufu), and Mencheres (Men-ka-re), the first
four kings of the fourth, are known to us from several inscrip-
tions. There is distinct monumental evidence that the second,
fourth, and fifth dynasties were contemporary. The fourth was
the principal one of the three, and bore sway at Memphis over
Lower Egypt, while the second ruled Middle Egypt from
This, and the fifth Upper Egypt from Elephantine. Probably
the kings of the second and fifth dynasties were connected by
blood with those of the fourth, and held their respective crowns
by permission of the Memphite sovereigns. The tombs of

ANCIENT HISTORY 57

monarchs belonging to all three dynasties exist in the neigh-
borhood of Memphis ; and there is even some doubt whether
a king of the fifth, Shafre, was not the true founder of the
" Second Pyramid " near that city.

The date of the establishment at Memphis of the fourth
dynasty is given variously as B.C. 3209 (Bunsen), B.C. 2450
(Wilkinson), and B.C. 2440 (Poole). And the time during
which it occupied the throne is estimated variously at 240, 210,
and 155 years. The Egyptian practice of association is a fertile
source of chronological confusion; and all estimates of the
duration of a dynasty, so long as the practice continued, are
mainly conjectural. Still the comparatively low dates of the
English Egfyptologers are on every ground preferable to the
higher dates of the Germans ; and the safest conclusion that
can be drawn from a comparison of Manetho with the monu-
ments seems to be, that a powerful monarchy was established
at Memphis as early as the middle of the twenty-fifth century
B.C., which was in some sort paramount over the whole
country.

It is evident from the monuments that the civilization of
Egypt at this early date was in many respects of an advanced
order. A high degree of mechanical science and skill is im-
plied in the quarrying, transporting, and raising into place of
the huge blocks whereof the pyramids are composed, and con-
siderable mathematical knowledge in the emplacement of each
pyramid so as exactly to face the cardinal points. Writing
appears in no rudimentary form, but in such a shape as to
imply long use. Besides the hieroglyphics, which are well and
accurately cut, a cursive character is seen on some of the
blocks, the precursor of the later hieratic. The reed-pen and
inkstand are among the hieroglyphics employed ; and the
scribe appears, pen in hand, in the paintings on the tombs,
making notes on linen or papyrus. The drawing of human
and animal figures is fully equal, if not superior, to that of
later times; and the trades represented are nearly the same
as are found under the Ramesside kings. Altogether it is
apparent that the Egyptians of the Pyramid period were not
just emerging out of barbarism, but were a people who had
made very considerable progress in the arts of life.

RAWLINSON

The governmental system was not of the simple character
which is found in kingdoms recently formed out of village or
tribe communities, but had a complicated organization of the
sort which usually grows up with time. Egypt was divided
into nomes, each of which had its governor. The military and
civil services were separate, and each possessed various grades
and kinds of functionaries. The priest caste was as distinct
as in later times, and performed much the same duties.

Aggressive war had begun to be waged. The mineral treas-
ures of the Sinaitic peninsula excited the cupidity of the Mem-
phitic kings, and Soris, the first king of the dynasty, seems
to have conquered and occupied it. The copper mines of Wady
Maghara and Sarabit-el-Kadim were worked by the great Pyr-
amid monarchs, whose operations there were evidently exten-
sive. Whether there is any ground for regarding the kinds
in question as especially tyrannical, may perhaps be doubted.
One of them was said to have written a sacred book, and an-
other (according to Herodotus) had the character of a mild
and good monarch. The pyramids may have been built by the
labor of captives taken in war, in which case the native popu-
lation would not have suffered by their erection.

CONTEMPORARY DYNASTIES FROM ABOUT B.C. 8440 TO 2220.

Branch Dynasty.
II. Thinite.

Yrs.

1. Boethus or Bochus 38

2. Kceechus (Ke-ke-

ou) 39

3. Binothris 47

4. Tlas 17

5. Sethenes 41

6. Chasres 17

7. Nephercheres 25

8. Sesochris. 48

9. Cheneres 30

302

Chief or Stem Dynasty.
IV. Memphite.

Yrs.

1. Soris 29

2. Suphis I ^

3. Suphis II. (broth- V66

er) )

4. Mencheres (son of

Suphis I.) 63

5. Ratoises 25

6. Bicheris 22

7. Sebercheres 7

8. Thamphthis 9

Branch Dynasty. V. Ele-
phantine.

Yrs.

1. Usercheres (Osir-

keO 28

2. Sephres (Shafr^) . . 13

3. Nephercheres

(Nofr-ir-ke-re) . . 20

4. Sisires (Osir-n-r^). 7

5. Chares 20

6. Rathures 44

7. Mencheres 9

8. Tancheres 44

9. Onnus (U-nas). ... 33

218

The fourth or " pyramid " dynasty was succeeded at Mem-
phis by the sixth Manethonian dynasty, about B.C. 2220. The

ANCIENT HISTORY

second and fifth still bore sway at This and Elephantine ; while
wholly new and probably independent dynasties now started
up at Heracleopolis and Thebes. The Memphitic kings lost
their pre-eminence. Egypt was broken up into really separate
kingdoms, among which the Theban gradually became the
most powerful.

CONTEMPORARY DYNASTIES FROM ABOUT B.C. 8IS0 TO «8a

IL
TmoTB.

VI. MBMrHrrx.

V. Elkphantink.

IX. Hkra-
CLBoroLint.

XI. Thbban.

(Continuiog
under the
last three

Y».

1. Othois 30

(a. Phios 53

3. Methosuphis 7]

4. Phiops(Pepi) loo

5. Menthesupnis i

6. Nitocris (Neit akret) is

143

(Continuing.)

Achthoes

(Muntopt I.

Series of

Enentefs.

Muntopt II.).

Sixteen kings.

17. Ammenemes
(Amun-m-h^).

The weakness of Egypt, thus parcelled out into five king-
doms, tempted foreign attack ; and, about B.C. 2080, or a little
later, a powerful enemy entered Lower Egypt from the north-
east, and succeeded in destroying the Memphite kingdom, and
obtaining possession of almost the whole country below lat.
29° 30'. These were the so-called Hyk-sos, or Shepherd Kings,
noAiades from either Syria or Arabia, who exercised with ex-
treme severity all the rights of conquerors, burning the cities,
razing the temples to the ground, exterminating the male
Egyptian population, and making slaves of the women and
children. There is reason to believe that at least two Shepherd
dynasties (Manetho's fifteenth and sixteenth) were established
simultaneously in the conquered territory, the fifteenth reign-
ing at Memphis, and the sixteenth either in the Delta, or at
Avaris (Pelusium?). Native Egfyptian dynasties continued,
however, to hold much of the country. The ninth (Heracleop-
olite) held the Faioom and the Nile valley southward as far
as Hermopolis ; the twelfth bore sway at Thebes ; the fifth
continued undisturbed at Elephantine. In the heart, more-
over, of the Shepherd conquests, a new native kingdom sprang
up; and the fourteenth (Xoite) dynasty maintained itself
throughout the whole period of Hyk-sos ascendency in the
most central portion of the Delta.

RAWLINSON

CONTEMPORARY DYNASTIES FROM

ABOUT B.C. S080 TO 1900.

V. Elk-

PHANTINB.

IX. Hera-

dEOPOUTK.

XII. Theban.

XIV.

XOITK.

XV.
Shepherds.

XVI.
Shepherds.

(Continuing
till about
ac. 1850.)

(Continu-
ing.)

Yrs.

1. Sesonchosis, son of

Ammenemes (Se-
sortasen I.) 46

2. Ammenemes II.

(Amun-m-hfe II.).. 38

3. Sesostris (Sesorta-

sen II.) 48

4. [La]mares (Am-un-

m-W III.) 8

5. Ameres 8

6. Ammenemes III.

(Amun-m-he IV.). 8

7. Skemiophris (his sis-

ter) 4

160
XIII. Theban.

Seventy-
six kings
in 484
years.

Yrs.

1. Salatis. . . 19

2. Bnon 44

3. Apachnas 36

4. Apophis . 61

5. Jannas... 50

6. Asses 49

259

Thirty
kings in
518 years.

Simultaneously with the irruption of the Shepherds occurred
an increase of the power of Thebes, which, under the monarchs
of the twelfth dynasty, the Sesortasens and Amun-m-hes ac-
quired a paramount authority over all Egypt from the borders
of Ethiopia to the neighborhood of Memphis. The Elephan-
tine and Heracleopolite dynasties, though continuing, became
subordinate. Even Heliopolis, below Memphis, owned the
authority of these powerful monarchs, who held the Sinaitic
peninsula, and carried their arms into Arabia and Ethiopia.
Amun-m-he III., who seems to be the Maris (or Lamaris)
of Manetho and the Mceris of Herodotus, constructed the
remarkable work in the Faioom known as the Labyrinth. Se-
sortasen I. built numerous temples, and erected an obelisk.
Architecture and the arts generally flourished ; irrigation was
extended ; and the oppression of Lower Egypt under the rude
Shepherd kings seemed for a considerable time to have aug-
mented, rather than diminished, the prosperity of the Upper
country.

But darker days arrived. The Theban monarchs of the thir-
teenth dynasty, less warlike or less fortunate than their prede-
cessors, found themselves unable to resist the terrible Shep-
herds, and, quitting their capital, fled into Ethiopia, while
the invaders wreaked their vengeance on the memorials of the
Sesortasens. Probably, after a while, the refugees returned

ANCIENT HISTORY 6i

and took up the position of tributaries, a position which must
also have been occupied by all the other native monarchs who
still maintained themselves, excepting possibly the Xoites,
who may have found the marshes of the Delta an effectual
protection. The complete establishment of the authority of
the Shepherds may be dated about B.C. 1900. Their do-
minion lasted till about B.C. 1525. The seventh and eighth
(Memphitic) dynasties, the tenth (Heracleopolite), and the
seventeenth (Shepherd) belong to this interval. This is the
darkest period of Egyptian history. The Shepherds left no
monuments ; and during nearly 300 years the very names of
the kings are unknown to us.

A new day breaks upon us with the accession to power of
Manetho's eighteenth dynasty, about B.C. 1525. A great na-
tional movement, headed by Amosis (Ames or Aahmes), king
of the Thebaid, drove the foreign invaders, after a stout con-
flict, from the soil of Egypt, and, releasing the country from the
incubus which had so long lain upon it, allowed the genius of
the people free play. The most flourishing period of Egyptian
history followed. The Theban king, who had led the move-
ment, received as his reward the supreme authority over the
whole country, a right which was inherited by his successors.
Egypt was henceforth, until the time of the Ethiopic conquest,
a single centralized monarchy. Contemporary dynasties
ceased. Egyptian art attained its highest perfection. The
great temple-palaces of Thebes were built. Numerous obelisks
were erected. Internal prosperity led to aggressive wars.
Ethiopia, Arabia, and Syria were invaded. The Euphrates
was crossed; and a portion of Mesopotamia added to the
empire.

The decline of Egypt under the twentieth dynasty is very
marked. We can ascribe it to nothing but internal decay —
a decay proceeding mainly from those natural causes which
are always at work, compelling nations and races, like indi-
viduals, after they have reached maturity, to sink in vital force,
to become debilitated, and finally to perish. Under the nine-
teenth dynasty Egypt reached her highest pitch of greatness,
internal and external; under the twentieth she rapidly sank,
alike in military power, in artistic genius, and in taste. For

62 RAWLINSON

a space of almost two centuries, from about B.C. 1170 to 990,
she scarcely undertook a single important enterprise; her
architectural efforts during the whole of this time were mean,
and her art without spirit or life. Subsequently, in the space
between B.C. 990 and the Persian conquest, B.C. 525, she
experienced one or two " revivals ; " but the reaction on these
occasions, being spasmodic and forced, exhausted rather than
recruited her strength ; nor did the efforts made, great as they
were, suffice to do more than check for a while the decadence
which they could not avert.

Among the special causes which produced this unusually
rapid decline, the foremost place must be assigned to the spirit
of caste, and particularly to the undue predominance of the
sacerdotal order. It is true that castes, in the strict sense of
the word, did not exist in Egypt, since a son was not abso-
lutely compelled to follow his father's profession. But the
separation of classes was so sharply and clearly defined, the
hereditary descent of professions was so much the rule, that the
system closely approximated to that which has been so long
established in India, and which prevails there at the present
day. It had, in fact, all the evils of caste. It discouraged prog-
ress, advance, improvement; it repressed personal ambition;
it produced deadness, flatness, dull and tame uniformity. The
priestly influence, which pervaded all ranks from the highest
to the lowest, was used to maintain a conventional standard,
alike in thought, in art, and in manners. Any tendency to
deviate from the set forms of the old religion, that at any time
showed itself, was sternly checked. The inclination of art to
become naturaUstic was curbed and subdued. All intercourse
with foreigners, which might have introduced changes of man-
ners, was forbidden. The aim was to maintain things at a
certain set level, which was fixed and unalterable. But, as
" non progredi est regredi," the result of repressing all advance
and improvement was to bring about a rapid and general de-
terioration.

The growing influence of the priests, which seems to have
reduced the later monarchs of the twentieth dynasty to
faineants, was shown still more markedly in the accession to
power, about B.C. 1085, of the priestly dynasty of " Tanites,"

ANCIENT HISTORY 63

who occupy the twenty-first place in Manetho's Hst. These
kings, who style themselves " High-priests of Amun," and
w^ho wear the priestly costume, seem to have held their court
at Tanis (Zoan), in the Delta, but were acknowledged for
kings equally in Upper Egypt. It must have been to one of
them that Hadad fled when Joab slaughtered the Edomites,
and in their ranks also must be sought the Pharaoh who gave
his daughter in marriage to Solomon. According to Manetho,
the dynasty held the throne for rather more than a hundred
years ; but the computation is thought to be in excess.

With Sheshonk, the first king of the twenty-second dynasty,
a revival of Egyptian power to a certain extent occurred.
Though Sheshonk himself takes the title of " High-priest of
Amun," having married the daughter of Pisham H., the last
king of the sacerdotal (twenty-first) dynasty, yet beyond this
no priestly character attaches to the monarchs of his house.
Sheshonk resumes the practice of military expeditions, and
his example is followed by one of the Osorkons. Monuments
of some pretensions are erected by the kings of the line, at
Thebes and at Bubastis in the Delta, which latter is the royal
city of the time. The revival, however, is partial and short-
lived, the later monarchs of the dynasty being as undistin-
guished as any that had preceded them on the throne.

The decline of the monarchy advanced now with rapid
strides. On the death of Takelot H., a disintegration of the
kingdom seems to have taken place. While the Bubastite line
was carried on in a third Pisham (or Pishai) and a fourth
Sheshonk, a rival line, Manetho's twenty-third dynasty, sprang
up at Tanis, and obtained the chief power. The kings of this
line, who are four in number, are wholly undistinguished.

A transfer of the seat of empire to Sais, another city of the
Delta, now took place. A king whom Manetho and Diodorus
called Bocchoris (perhaps Pehor) ascended the throne. This
monarch, after he had reigned forty-four years — either as an
independent prince or as a tributary to Ethiopia — was put to
death by Sabaco, an Ethiopian, who conquered Egfypt and
founded the twenty-fifth dynasty.

Thus it appears that between B.C. 730 and 665 Eg^t was
conquered twice — ^first by the Ethiopians, and then, within

64 RAWLINSON

about sixty years, by the Assyrians. The native Egyptian
army had grown to be weak and contemptible, from a prac-
tice, which sprang up under the Sheshonks, of employing
mainly foreign troops in military expeditions. There was also
(as has been observed already) a general decline of the national
spirit, which made submission to a foreign yoke less galling
than it would have been at an earlier date.

It is difficult to say at what exact time the yoke of Assyria
was thrown off. Psammetichus (Psamatik I.), who seems to
have succeeded his father, Nechoh, or to have been associated
by him, almost immediately after his (Nechoh's) establishment
as viceroy by Asshur-bani-pal, counted his reign from the
abdication of Tirhakah, as if he had from that time been inde-
pendent and sole king. But there can be little doubt that in
reality for several years he was merely one of many rulers,
all equally subject to the great monarch of Assyria. The revolt
which he headed may have happened in the reign of Asshur-
bani-pal; but, more probably, it fell in that of his successor.
Perhaps its true cause was the shattering of Assyrian power
by the invasion of the Scyths, about B.C. 632. Psammetichus,
by the aid of Greek mercenaries, and (apparently) after some
opposition from his brother viceroys, made himself indepen-
dent, and established his dominion over the whole of Egypt.
Native rule was thus restored after nearly a century of foreign
domination.

The revolts of Egypt from Persia will necessarily come under
consideration in the section on the Achaemenian Monarchy.
Egypt was the most disaffected of all the Persian provinces,
and was always striving after independence. Her antagonism
to Persia seems to have been less political than polemical.
It was no doubt fermented by the priests. On two occasions
independence was so far achieved that native rulers were set
up ; and Manetho counts three native dynasties as interrupting
the regular succession of the Persians. These form the twenty-
eighth, the twenty-ninth, and the thirtieth of his series. The
first of these consists of one king only, Amyrtseus, who revolted
in conjunction with Inarus, and reigned from B.C. 460 to 455.
The other two dynasties are consecutive, and cover the space
from the revolt in the reign of Darius Nothus (B.C. 405) to
the re-conquest under Ochus (B.C. 346).

ANCIENT HISTORY 6$

CARTHAGE.

The history of Carthage may be conveniently divided into
three periods — the first extending from the foundation of the
city to the commencement of the wars with Syracuse, B.C.
850 to 480 ; the next from the first attack on Syracuse to the
breaking out of war with Rome, B.C. 480 to 264; and the
third from the commencement of the Roman wars to their
termination by the destruction of Carthage, B.C. 264 to 146.
In the present place, only the first and second of these periods
will be considered.

FIRST PERIOD.

From the Foundation of Carthage to the Commencement of
the Wars with Syracuse, from about B.C. 850 to 480.

The foundation of Carthage, which was mentioned in the
Tyrian histories, belonged to the time of Pygmalion, the son
of Matgen, who seems to have reigned from about B.C. 871
to 824. The colony appears to have taken its rise, not from
the mere commercial spirit in which other Tyrian settlements
on the same coast had originated, but from political differ-
ences. Still, its relations with the mother city were, from first
to last, friendly; though the bonds of union were under the
Phoenician system of colonization even weaker and looser than
under the Greek. The site chosen for the settlement was a
peninsula, projecting eastward into the Gulf of Tunis, and
connected with the mainland towards the west by an isthmus
about three miles across. Here were some excellent land-
locked harbors, a position easily defensible, and a soil which
was fairly fertile. The settlement was made with the good-
will of the natives, who understood the benefits of commerce,
and gladly let to the new-comers a portion of their soil at a
fixed rent. For many years the place must have been one
of small importance, little (if at all) superior to Utica or Hadru-
metum; but by degrees an advance was made, and within a
century or two from the date of her foundation, Carthage had

66 RAWLINSON

become a considerable power, had shot ahead of all the other
Phoenician settlements in these parts, and had acquired a large
and valuable dominion.

The steps of the advance are somewhat difficult to trace. It
would seem, however, that, unlike the other Phoenician col-
onies, and unlike the Phoenician cities of the Asiatic mainland
themselves, Carthage aimed from the first at uniting a land
with a sea dominion. The native tribes in the neighborhood
of the city, originally nomades, were early won to agricultural
occupations; Carthaginian colonies were thickly planted
among them; intermarriages between the colonists and the
native races were encouraged; and a mixed people grew up
in the fertile territory south and south-west of Carthage, known
as Liby-Phoenices, who adopted the language and habits of the
immigrants, and readily took up the position of faithful and
attached subjects. Beyond the range of territory thus occu-
pied, Carthaginian influence was further extended over a large
number of pure African tribes, of whom some applied them-
selves to agriculture, while the majority preserved their old
nomadic mode of life. These tribes, like the Arabs in the
modern Algeria, were held in a loose and almost nominal sub-
jection ; but still were reckoned as, in a certain sense, Cartha-
ginian subjects, and no doubt contributed to the resources of
the empire. The proper territory of Carthage was regarded
as extending southward as far as the Lake Triton, and west-
ward to the river Tusca, which divided Zeugitana from Nu-
midia, thus nearly coinciding with the modern Beylik of Tunis.

But these limits were far from contenting the ambition of
the Carthaginians. From the compact and valuable territory
above described, they proceeded to bring within the scope of
their influence the tracts which lay beyond it eastward and
westward. The authority of Carthage came gradually to be
acknowledged by all the coast-tribes between the Tusca and
the Pillars of Hercules, as well as by the various nomad races
between Lake Triton and the territory of Cyrene. In the
former tract numerous settlements were made, and a right
of marching troops along the shore was claimed and exercised.
From the latter only commercial advantages were derived;
but these were probably of considerable importance.

ANCIENT HISTORY 67

In considering the position of the Carthaginians in Africa,
it must not be forgotten that the Phoenicians had founded nu-
merous settlements on the African mainland, and that Car-
thage was only the most powerful of these colonies. Utica,
Hadrumetum, Leptis Magna, and other places, were at the
first independent communities over which Carthage had no
more right to exercise authority than they had over her. The
dominion of Carthage seems to have been by degrees extended
over these places ; but to the last some of them, more especially
Utica, retained a certain degree of independence ; and, so far
as these settlements are concerned, we must view Carthage
rather as the head of a confederacy than as a single centralized
power. Her confederates were too weak to resist her or to
exercise much check upon her policy; but she had the dis-
advantage of being less than absolute mistress of many places
lying within her territory.

But the want of complete unity at home did not prevent
her from aspiring after an extensive foreign dominion. Her
influence was established in Western Sicily at an early date,
and superseded in that region the still more ancient influence
of Phoenicia. Sardinia was conquered, after long and bloody
wars, towards the close of the sixth century B.C. The Balearic
islands, Majorca, Minorca, and Ivica, seem to have been occu-
pied even earlier. At a later time, settlements were made in
Corsica and Spain ; while the smaller islands, both of the Medi-
terranean and the Atlantic, Madeira, the Canaries, Malta, Gau-
los (Gozo), and Cercina, were easily subjugated. By the close
of the sixth century, Carthaginian power extended from the
greater Syrtis to the Fortunate Islands, and from Corsica to
the flanks of Atlas.

To effect her conquests, the great trading city had, almost
of necessity, recourse to mercenaries. Mercenaries had been
employed by the Egyptian monarchs as early as the time of
Psammetichus (B.C. 664), and were known to Homer about
two centuries previously. Besides the nucleus of a disciplined
force which Carthage obtained from her own native citizens
and from the mixed race of Liby-Phoenices, and besides the
irregulars which she drew from her other subjects, it was her
practice to maintain large bodies of hired troops (jiuT0o<l>6pow\

68 RAWLINSON

derived partly from the independent African nations, such as
the Numidians and the Mauritanians, partly from the warlike
European races with which her foreign trade brought her into
contact — the Iberians of Spain, the Celts of Gaul, and the Li-
gurians of Northern Italy. The first evidence that we have of
the existence of this practice belongs to the year B.C. 480;
but there is sufficient reason to believe that it commenced con-
siderably earlier.

The naval power of Carthage must have dated from the
foundation of the city ; for, as the sea in ancient times swarmed
with pirates, an extensive commerce required and implies the
possession of a powerful navy. For several centuries the great
PhcEnician settlement must have been almost undisputed mis-
tress of the Western and Central Mediterranean, the only
approach to a rival being Tyrrhenia, which was, however, de-
cidedly inferior. The officers and sailors in the fleets were
mostly native Carthaginians, while the rowers were mainly
slaves, whom the State bred or bought for the purpose.

Towards the middle of the sixth century B.C., the jealousy
of the Carthaginians was aroused by the intrusion, into waters
which they regarded as their own, of Greek commerce. The
enterprising Phocseans opened a trade with Tartessus, founded
Massilia near the mouth of the Rhone, and sought to establish
themselves in Corsica in force. Hereupon Carthage, assisted
by Tyrrhenia, destroyed the Phocaean fleet, about B.C. 550.
Soon afterwards quarrels arose in Sicily between the Cartha-
ginians and the Greek settlements there, provoked apparently
by the latter. About the same time Rome, under the second
Tarquin, became a flourishing kingdom, and a naval power
of some consequence ; and Carthage, accustomed to maintain
friendly relations with the Italians, concluded a treaty with
the rising State, about B.C. 508.

The constitution of Carthage, like that of most other great
trading communities, was undoubtedly aristocratic. The na-
tive element, located at Carthage, or in the immediate neigh-
borhood, was the sole depositary of political power, and gov-
erned at its will all the rest of the empire. Within this native
element itself the chief distinction, which divided class from
class, was that of wealth. The two SufTetes indeed, who stood

ANCIENT HISTORY 69

in a certain sense at the head of the State, seem to have been
chosen only from certain families; but otherwise all native
Carthaginians were eligible to all offices. Practically what
threw power into the hands of the rich was the fact that no
office was salaried, and that thus the poor man could not afford
to hold office. Public opinion was also strongly in favor of
the rich. Candidates for power were expected to expend large
sums of money, if not in actual bribery, yet at any rate in treat-
ing on the most extensive scale. Thus office, and with it
power, became the heritage of a certain knot of peculiarly
wealthy families.

At the head of the State were two Suffetes, or Judges, who
in the early times were Captains-general as well as chief civil
magistrates, but whose office gradually came to be regarded
as civil only and not military. These were elected by the citi-
zens from certain families, probably for life. The next power
in the State was the Council (ovy/cXi/ro?), a body consisting of
several hundreds, from which were appointed, directly or in-
directly, almost all the officers of the government — as the Sen-
ate of One Hundred (yepovaia), a Select Committee of the
Council which directed all its proceedings; and the Pentar-
chies, Commissions of Five Members each, which managed
the various departments of State, and filled up vacancies in the
Senate. The Council of One Hundred (or, with the two Suf-
fetes and the two High-priests, 104) Judges, a High Court of
Judicature elected by the people, was the most popular element
in the Constitution; but even its members were practically
chosen from the upper classes, and their power was used rather
to check the excessive ambition of individual members of the
aristocracy than to augment the civil rights or improve the
social condition of the people. The people, however, were
contented. They elected the SuflFetes under certain restric-
tions, and the generals freely ; they probably filled up vacancies
in the Great Council ; and in cases where the Suffetes and the
Council differed, they discussed and determined political meas-
ures. Questions of peace and war, treaties, and the like, were
frequently, though not necessarily, brought before them ; and
the aristocratical character of the Constitution was maintained
by the weight of popular opinion, which was in favor of power

70 RAWLINSON

resting with the rich. Through the openings which trade gave
to enterprise any one might become rich ; and extreme poverty-
was almost unknown, since no sooner did it appear than it
was reUeved by the planting of colonies and the allotment of
waste lands to all who applied for them.

As the power of Carthage depended mainly on her mainte-
nance of huge armies of mercenaries, it was a necessity of her
position that she should have a large and secure revenue. This
she drew, in part from State property, particularly mines, in
Spain and elsewhere; in part from tribute, which was paid
alike by the federate cities (Utica, Hadrumetum, etc.), by the
Liby-Phoenices, by the dependent African nomades, and by the
provinces (Sardinia, Sicily, etc.) ; and in part from customs,
which were exacted rigorously through all her dominions.
The most elastic of these sources of revenue was the tribute,
which was augmented or diminished as her needs required;
and which is said to have amounted sometimes to as much as
fifty per cent, on the income of those subject to it.

The extent of Carthaginian commerce is uncertain; but
there can be little doubt that it reached, at any rate, to the fol-
lowing places : in the north, Cornwall and the Scilly Islands ;
in the east, Phoenicia ; towards the west, Madeira, the Canaries,
and the coast of Guinea; towards the south, Fezzan. It was
chiefly a trade by which Carthage obtained the commodities
that she needed — wine, oil, dates, salt fish, silphium, gold, tin,
lead, salt, ivory, precious stones, and slaves; exchanging
against them their own manufactures — textile fabrics, hard-
ware, pottery, ornaments for the person, harness for horses,
tools, etc. But it was also to a considerable extent a carrying
trade, whereby Carthage enabled the nations of Western
Europe, Western Asia, and the interior of Africa to obtain
respectively each other's products. It was in part a land, in
part a sea traffic. While the Carthaginian merchants scoured
the seas in all directions in their trading vessels, caravans di-
rected by Carthaginian enterprise penetrated the Great Desert,
and brought to Carthage from the south and the south-east
the products of those far-off regions. Upper Egypt, Cyrene,
the oases of the Sahara, Fezzan, perhaps Ethiopia and Bornou,
carried on in this way a traffic with the great commercial em-

ANCIENT HISTORY 71

porium. By sea her commerce was especially with Tyre, with
her own colonies, with the nations of the Western Mediterra-
nean, with the tribes of the African coast from the Pillars of
Hercules to the Bight of Benin, and with the remote barbarians
of South-western Albion.

SECOND PERIOD.

From the Commencement of the Wars with Syracuse to the
breaking out of the first War with Rome, B.C. 480 to 264.

The desire of the Carthaginians to obtain complete posses-
sion of Sicily is in no way strange or surprising. Their pres-
tige rested mainly on their maritime supremacy; and this
supremacy was open to question, so long as the large island
which lay closest to them and most directly opposite to their
shores was mainly, or even to any g^eat extent, under the in-
fluence of aliens. The settlement of the Greeks in Sicily, about
B.C. 750 to 700, preceded the rise of the Carthaginians to
greatness ; and it must have been among the earliest objects
of ambition of the last-named people, after they became power-
ful, to drive the Hellenes from the island. It would seem, how-
ever, that no g^eat expedition had been made prior to B.C.
480. Till then Carthage had been content to hold the western
comer of the island only, and to repulse intruders into that
region, like Dorieus. But in B.C. 480, when the expedition
of Xerxes gave full occupation to the bulk of the Greek nation,
Carthage conceived that the time was come at which she might
expect to attack the Greeks of Sicily with success, and to con-
quer them before they could receive succors from the mother
country. Accordingly, a vast army was collected, and under
Hamilcar, son of Mago, a g^eat attack was made. But the
victory of Gelo at Himera completely frustrated the expedition.
Hamilcar fell or slew himself. The invading army was with-
drawn, and Carthage consented to conclude an ignominious
peace.

The check thus received induced the Carthaginians to sus-
pend for a while their desigfns against the coveted island. At-
tention was turned to the consolidation of their African power ;

RAWLINSON

and under Hannibal, Hasdrubal, and Sappho, grandsons of
Mago and nephews of Hamilcar, the native Libyan tribes were
reduced to more complete dependence, and Carthage was re-
leased from a tribute which she had hitherto paid as an ac-
knowledgment that the site on which she stood was Libyan
ground. A contest was also carried on with the Greek settle-
ment of Cyrene, which terminated to the advantage of Car-
thage. Anticipated danger from the excessive influence of
the family of Mago was guarded against by the creation of the
Great Council of Judges, before whom every general had to
appear on his return from an expedition.

It was seventy years after their first ignominious failure when
the Carthaginians once more invaded Sicily in force. Invited
by Egesta to assist her against Selinus, they crossed over with
a vast fleet and army, under the command of Hannibal, the
grandson of Hamilcar, B.C. 409, destroyed Selinus and Hi-
mera, defeated the Greeks in several battles, and returned home
in triumph. This first success was followed by wars (i) with
Dionysius I., tyrant of Syracuse; (2) with Dionysius II. and
Timoleon ; and (3) with Agathocles.

The result of these wars was not, on the whole, encouraging.
At the cost of several hundreds of thousands of men, of large
fleets, and of an immense treasure, Carthage had succeeded in
maintaining possession of about one-third of Sicily, but had
not advanced her boundary by a single mile. Her armies had
generally been defeated, if they engaged their enemy upon
any thing like even terms. She had found her generals de-
cidedly inferior to those of the Greeks. Above all, she had
learnt that she was vulnerable at home — that descents might
be made on her own shores, and that her African subjects
were not to be depended on. Still, she did not relinquish her
object. After the death of Agathocles in B.C. 289, the Hel-
lenic power in Sicily rapidly declined. The Mamertines seized
Messana; and Carthage, resuming an aggressive attitude,
seemed on the point of obtaining all her desires. Agrigentum
was once more taken, all the southern part of the island oc-
cupied, and Syracuse itself threatened. But the landing of
Pyrrhus at the invitation of Syracuse saved the city, and
turned the fortune of war against Carthage, B.C. 279. His

ANCIENT HISTORY 73

flight, two years later, did not restore matters to their former
condition. Carthage had contracted obHgations towards Syra-
cuse in the war against Pyrrhus; and, moreover, a new contest
was evidently impending. The great aggressive power of the
West, Rome, was about to appear upon the scene; and, to
resist her, Carthage required the friendly co-operation of the
Greeks. A treaty was consequently made with Hiero; and
Carthage paused, biding her time, and still hoping at no dis-
tant period to extend her domination over the entire island.

BOOK II
HISTORY OF PERSIA

BOOK II

HISTORY OF PERSIA FROM THE ACCESSION OF CYRUS
TO THE DESTRUCTION OF THE EMPIRE BY ALEX-
ANDER, FROM B.C. 558 TO 330.

The Persians appear to have formed a part of a great Arian
migration from the countries about the Oxus, which began at
a very remote time, but was not completed till about B.C. 650.
The line of migration was first westward, along the Elburz
range into Armenia and Azerbijan, then south along Zagros,
and finally south-east into Persia Proper. The chief who first
set up an Arian monarchy in this last-named region seems to
have been a certain Achaemenes (Hakhamanish), who probably
ascended the throne about a century before Cyrus.

The nation was composed of two classes of persons — the
settled population, which lived in towns or villages, for the
most part cultivating the soil, and the pastoral tribes, whose
habits were nomadic. The latter consisted of four distinct
tribes — the Dai, the Mardi, the Dropici or Derbices, and the
Sagartii ; while the former comprised the six divisions of the
Pasargadae. the Maraphii, the Maspii, the Panthialaei, the
Derusiaei, and the Germanii or Carmanians. Of these, the first
three were superior; and a very marked precedency or pre-
eminency attached to the Pasargadae. They formed a species
of nobility, holding almost all the high offices both in the army
and at the court. The royal family of the Achaemenidse, or
descendants of Achaemenes, belonged to this leading tribe.

A line of native Persian kings held the throne from Achae-
menes to Cyrus; but the sovereignty which they possessed
was not, at any rate in the times immediately preceding Cyrus,
an independent dominion. Relations of a feudal character
bound Persia to Media; and the Achaemenian princes, either
from the first, or certainly from some time before Cyrus re-

78 RAWLINSON

belled, acknowledged the Median monarch for their suzerain.
Cyrus lived as a sort of hostage at the court of Astyages, and
could not leave it without permission. Cambyses, his father,
had the royal title, and, practically, governed Persia; but he
was subject to Astyages, and probably paid him an annual
tribute.

The revolt of the Persians was not the consequence of their
suffering any grievous oppression; nor did it even arise from
any wide-spread discontent or dissatisfaction with their condi-
tion. Its main cause was the ambition of Cyrus. That prince
had seen, as he grew up at Ecbatana, that the strength of the
Medes was undermined by luxury, that their old warlike habits
were laid aside, and that, in all the qualities which make the
soldier, they were no match for his own countrymen. He
had learnt to despise the faineant monarch who occupied the
Median throne. It occurred to him that it would be easy to
make Persia an independent power; and this was probably all
that he at first contemplated. But the fatal persistence of the
Median monarch in attempts to reduce the rebels, and his
capture in the second battle of Pasargadae, opened the way
to greater changes; and the Persian prince, rising to a level
with the occasion, pushed his own country into the imperial
position from which the success of his revolt had dislodged
the Medes.

The warlike prince who thus conquered the Persian empire
did little to organize it. Professing, probably, a purer form
of Zoroastrianism than that which prevailed in Media, where
a mongrel religion had grown up from the mixture of the old
Arian creed with Scythic element-worship, he retained his own
form of belief as the religion of the empire. Universal tolera-
tion was, however, established. The Jews, regarded with spe-
cial favor as monotheists, were replaced in their proper coun-
try. Ecbatana was kept as the capital, while Pasargadae be-
came a sacred city, used for coronations and interments. The
civilization of the Medes, their art, architecture, ceremonial,
dress, manners, and to some extent their luxury, were adopted
by the conquering people. The employment of letters in in-
scriptions on public monuments began. No general system
of administration was established. Some countries remained

ANCIENT HISTORY 79

under tributary native kings; others were placed under gov-
ernors; in some the governmental functions were divided, and
native officers shared the administration with Persians. The
rate of tribute was not fixed. Cyrus left the work of consolida-
tion and organization to his successors, content to have given
them an empire on which to exercise their powers.

The close of the reig^ of Cyrus is shrouded in some ob-
scurity. We do not know why he did not carry out his designs
against Egj'pt, nor what occupied him in the interval between
B.C. 538 and 529. We can not even say with any certainty
against what enemy he was engaged when he lost his life.
Herodotus and Ctesias are here irreconcilably at variance, and
though the authority of the former is greater, the narrative of
the latter is in this instance the more credible. Both writers,
however, are agreed that the Persian king was engaged in
chastising an enemy on his north-eastern frontier, when he
received the wound from which he died. Probably he was
endeavoring to strike terror into the nomadic hordes who here
bordered the empire, and so to secure his territories from their
dreaded aggressions. If this was his aim, his enterprise was
successful ; for we hear of no invasion of Persia from the Tur-
coman country until after the time of Alexander.

Cyrus left behind him two sons, Cambyses and Bardius, or
(as the Greeks called him) Smerdis. To the former he left the
regal title and the greater portion of his dominions; to the
latter he secured the inheritance of some large and important
provinces. This imprudent arrangement cost Smerdis his life,
by rousing the jealousy of his brother, who very early in his
reign caused him to be put to death secretly.

The genius of Cambyses was warlike, like that of his father;
but he did not possess the same ability. Nevertheless he
added important provinces to the empire. First of all he pro-
cured the submission of Phoenicia and Cyprus, the great naval
powers of Western Asia, which had not been subject to Cyrus.
He then invaded Africa, B.C. 525, defeated Psammenitus in a
pitched battle, took Memphis, conquered Egypt, received the
submission of the neighboring Libyan tribes, and of the Greek
towns of the Cyrenaica, and proceeded to form designs of re-
markable g^ndeur. But these projects all miscarried. The

8o RAWLINSON

expedition against Carthage was stopped by the refusal of the
Phoenicians to attack their own colony; that against the oasis
of Ammon ended in a frightful disaster. His own march
against Ethiopia was arrested by the failure of provisions and
water in the Nubian desert; and the losses which he incurred
by persisting too long in his attempt brought Egypt to the
brink of rebellion. The severe measures taken to repress this
revolt were directed especially against the powerful caste of
the priests, and had the effect of thoroughly alienating the
province, which thenceforth never ceased to detest and plot
against its conquerors.

The stay of Cambyses in Egypt, imprudently prolonged,
brought about a revolution at the Medo-Persian capital. A
Magus, named Gomates, supported by his order, which was
powerful in many parts of the empire, ventured to personate
the dead Smerdis, and seized the throne in his name. His
claim was tacitly acknowledged. Cambyses, when the news
reached him in Syria on his march homeward, despairing of
being able to make head against the impostor, committed
suicide — B.C. 522 — after having reigned eight years.

To conciliate his subjects, the pseudo-Smerdis began his
reign by a three years' remission of tribute, and an exemption
of the conquered nations from military service for the like
space. At the same time, he adopted an extreme system of
seclusion, in the hope that his imposture might escape detec-
tion, never quitting the palace, and allowing no communication
between his wives and their relations. But the truth gradually
oozed out. His religious reforms were startling in an Achse-
menian prince. His seclusion was excessive and suspicious.
Doubts began to be entertained, and secret messages between
the great Persian nobles and some of the palace inmates con-
verted these doubts into certainty. Darius, the son of Hystas-
pes, and probably heir-presumptive to the crown, headed an
insurrection, and the impostor was slain after he had reigned
eight months.

Darius I., who ascended the throne in January, B.C. 521,
and held it for nearly thirty-six years, was the greatest of the
Persian monarchs. He was at once a conqueror and an ad-
ministrator. During the earlier part of his reign he was en-

ANCIENT HISTORY 8i

g^ged in a series of struggles against rebellions, which broke
out in almost all parts of the empire. Susiana, Babylonia,
Persia Proper, Media, Assyria, Armenia, Hyrcania, Parthia,
Margiana, Sagartia, and Sacia successively revolted. The sa-
traps in Egypt and Asia Minor acted as though independent
of his authority. The empire was shaken to its centre, and
threatened to fall to pieces. But the military talent and pru-
dence of the legitimate monarch prevailed. Within the space
of six years the rebellions were all put down, the pretenders
executed, and tranquillity generally restored throughout the
disturbed provinces.

The evils of disorganization, which had thus manifested
themselves so conspicuously, may have led Darius to turn his
thoughts towards a remedy. At any rate, to him belongs the
credit of having given to the Persian empire that peculiar or-
ganization and arrangement which maintained it in a fairly
flourishing condition for nearly two centuries. He divided
the whole empire into twenty (?) governments, called " sa-
trapies," and established everywhere a uniform and somewhat
complicated governmental system. Native tributary kings
were swept away; and, in lieu of them, a single Persian official
held in each province the supreme civil authority. A standing
army of Medo-Persians, dispersed throughout the empire,
supported the civil power, maintained tranquillity, and wgs
ready to resist the attacks of foreigners. A fixed rate of tribute
took the place of arbitrary exactions. " Royal roads " were
established, and a system of posts arranged, whereby the court
received rapid intelligence of all that occurred in the provinces,
and promptly communicated its own commands to the remot-
est corners of the Persian territory.

The military system, established or inherited by Darius, had
for its object to combine the maximum of efficiency against a
foreign enemy with the minimum of danger from internal dis-
affection. The regular profession of arms was confined to
the dominant race — or to that race and a few others of closely
kindred origin — and a standing army, thus composed and
amounting to several hundreds of thousands, maintained order
throughout the Great King's dominions, and conducted the
smaller and less important expeditions. But when danger
. 6

82 RAWLINSON

threatened, or a great expedition was to be undertaken, the
whole empire was laid under contribution; each one of the
subject nations was required to send its quota; and in this way
armies were collected which sometimes exceeded a million of
men. In the later times, mercenaries were largely employed,
not only in expeditions, but as a portion of the standing army.

The navy of the Persians was drawn entirely from the con-
quered nations. Phoenicia, Egypt, Cyprus, Cilicia, Asiatic
Greece, and other of the maritime countries subject to Persia,
furnished contingents of ships and crews according to their
relative strength; and fleets were thus collected of above a
thousand vessels. The ship of war ordinarily employed was
the trireme; but lesser vessels were also used occasionally.
The armed force on board the ships {cTn^drai or " marines ")
was Medo-Persian, either wholly or predominantly; and the
fleets were usually placed under a Persian or Median com-
mander.

The great king to whom Persia owed her civil, and (prob-
ably in part) her military organization, was not disposed to
allow the warlike qualities of his subjects to rust for want of
exercise. Shortly after the revolts had been put down, Darius
I., by himself or by his generals, commenced and carried out
a series of military expeditions of first-rate importance. The
earliest of these was directed against Western India, or the
regions now known as the Punjab and Scinde. After explor-
ing the country by means of boats, which navigated the Indus
from Attock to the sea, he led or sent a body of troops into
the region, and rapidly reduced it to subjection. A valuable
gold-tract was thus added to the empire, and the revenue was
augmented by about one-third. Commerce also received an
impulse from the opening of the Indian market to Persian
traders, who thenceforth kept up a regular communication
with the tribes bordering the Indus by coasting vessels which
started from the Persian Gulf.

The next great expedition was in the most directly opposite
direction. It was undertaken against the numerous and war-
like Scythian nation which possessed the vast plains of South-
ern Russia, extending between the Don and the Danube, the
region now generally known as the Ukraine. The object of

ANCIENT HISTORY 8^

this expedition was not conquest, but the exhibition of the
Persian military strength, the sight of which was calculated
to strike terror into the Scythic hordes, and to prevent them
from venturing to invade the territory of so powerful a neigh-
bor. The great Persian kings, like the great Roman emperors,
caused their own frontiers to be respected by overstepping
them, and ravaging with fire and sword the countries of the
fierce Northern barbarians.

The sequel of the Scythian expedition was the firm estab-
lishment of the Persian power on the European side of the
straits, and the rapid extension of it over the parts of Thrace
bordering on the ^Egean, over the adjoining country of Pae-
onia, and even over the still more remote Macedonia. The
Persian dominion now reached from the Indian desert to the
borders of Thessaly, and from the Caucasus to Ethiopia.

Simultaneously with the Scythic expedition, Aryandes, the
satrap of Egypt, marched against the Greek town of Barca,
in Africa, to avenge the murder of a king who was a Persian
tributary. Barca was taken, and its inhabitants transplanted
to Asia; but the hostility of the semi-independent nomades
was aroused, and the army on its return suffered no incon-
siderable losses.

Not long afterwards the ambitious designs of Darius were
violently interrupted by a revolt second in importance to
scarcely any of those which had occupied his early years. The
Greeks of Asia, provoked by the support which Darius lent
to their tyrants, and perhaps rendered sensible of their power
by the circumstances of the Scythic campaign, broke out into
general rebellion at the instigation of Aristagoras of Miletus,
murdered or expelled their tyrants, and defied the power of
Persia. Two states of European Greece, Athens and Eretria,
joined the rebels. Bold counsels prevailed, and an attack was
made on the satrapial capital, Sardis. Unfortunately, the
capture of the city was followed by its accidental conflagration;
and the small knot of invaders, forced to retreat, were over-
taken and defeated in the battle of Ephesus, whereupon the
two European allies deserted the falling cause. On the other
hand, numerous states, both European and Asiatic, excited
by the news of the fall of Sardis, asserted independence; and

84 RAWLINSON

the flames of rebellion were lighted along the entire Asiatic
coast from the Sea of Marmora to the Gulf of Issus. The
Ionian, ^olic, and Hellespontine Greeks, the Carians and
Caunians of the south-western corner of the peninsula, and
the Cyprians, both Greek and native, made common cause;
several battles were fought with varying success; but at last
the power of Persia prevailed. The confederate fleet suffered
defeat in the battle of Lade, and soon afterwards Miletus was
taken. The rebellious states were punished with great severity,
and the authority of Darius was once more firmly established
in all the revolted countries.

The honor of the Great King required that immediate ven-
geance should be taken on the bold foreigners who had inter-
meddled between him and his subjects. But, even apart from
this, an expedition against Greece was certain, and could only
be a question of time. The exploring voyage of Democedes,
about B.C. 510, shows that even before the Scythian campaign
an attack on this quarter was intended. An expedition was
therefore fitted out, in B.C. 493, under Mardonius, which took
the coast-line through Thrace and Macedonia. A storm at
Athos, however, shattered the fleet; and the land-army was
crippled by a night attack of the Brygi. Mardonius returned
home without effecting his purpose; but his expedition was
not wholly fruitless. His fleet reduced Thasos; and his army
forced the Macedonians to exchange their positions of semi-
independence for complete subjection to Persia.

The failure of Mardonius was followed within two years
by the second great expedition against Greece — the first which
reached it — that conducted by Datis. Datis proceeded by sea,
crossing through the Cyclades, and falling first upon Eretria,
which was besieged, and taken by treachery. A landing was
then made at Marathon; but the defeat of the Persian host
by Miltiades, and his rapid march to Athens immediately after
the victory, frustrated the expedition, disappointing alike the
commander and the Athenian ex-tyrant, Hippias, who had
accompanied it.

Undismayed by his two failures, Darius commenced prepa-
rations for a third attack, and would probably have proceeded
in person against Athens, had not the revolt of Egypt first

ANCIENT HISTORY 85

(B.C. 487), and then his own death (B.C. 486), intervened.
Darius died after nominating as his successor, not his eldest
son, Artobazanes, but the eldest of his sons by Atossa, daugh-
ter of Cyrus — a prince who had thus the advantage of having
in his veins the blood of the great founder of the empire.

Darius probably died at Susa; but he was buried in the
vicinity of Persepolis, where he had prepared himself an elabo-
rate rock tomb, adorned with sculptures and bearing a long
inscription — all which remain to the present day. The g^eat
palace of Persepolis, in all its extent and grandeur, was his
conception, if not altogether his work; as was also the equally
magnificent structure at Susa, which was the ordinary royal
residence from his time. He likewise set up the great rock
inscription at Behistun (Bagistan), the most valuable of all
the Persian monumental remains. Other memorials of his
reign have been found, or are known to have existed, at Ecba-
tana, at Byzantium, in Thrace, and in Egypt. In the last-
named country he reopened the great canal between the Nile
and the Red Sea, which the Ramessides had originally cut,
and the Psamatiks had vainly endeavored to re-establish.

Xerxes I., who succeeded Darius, B.C. 486, commenced his
reign by the reduction of Egypt, B.C. 485, which he intrusted
to his brother, Achaemenes. He then provoked and chastised
a rebellion of the Babylonians, enriching himself with the
plunder of their temples. After this he turned his attention
to the invasion of Greece.

Too much weight has probably been assigned to the cabals
and intrigues of the Persian nobles, and the Greek refugees
at Xerxes's court. Until failure checked the military aspira-
tions of the nation, a Persian prince was almost under the
necessity of undertaking some great conquest; and there was
at this time no direction in which an expedition could so read-
ily be undertaken as towards the west. Elsewhere high moun-
tains, broad seas, or barren deserts skirted the empire — here
only did Persian territory adjoin on a fruitful, well-watered,
and pleasant region. The attempt to reduce Greece was the
natural sequel to the conquests of Egypt, India, Thrace, and
Macedon.

It was now the turn of the Greeks to retaliate on their

86 RAWLINSON

prostrate foe. First under the lead of Sparta and then under
that of Athens they freed the islands of the ^Egean from the
Persian yoke, expelled the Persian garrisons from Europe,
and even ravaged the Asiatic coast and made descents on it
at their pleasure. For twelve years no Persian fleet ventured
to dispute with them the sovereignty of the seas; and when
at last, in B.C. 466, a naval force was collected to protect
Cilicia and Cyprus, it was defeated and destroyed by Cimon
at the Eurymedon.

Soon after this Xerxes's reign came to an end. This weak
prince, after the failure of his grand expedition, desisted from
all military enterprise. No doubt his empire was greatly in-
jured and exhausted by its losses in the Grecian war, and a
period of repose was absolutely necessary; but it would seem
to have been natural temperament, as much as prudence, that
caused the unwarlike monarch to rest content under his dis-
comfiture, and to make no effort to wipe out its disgrace.
Xerxes, on his return to Asia, found consolation for his mili-
tary failure in the delights of the seraglio, and ceased to
trouble himself much about affairs of State. He was satisfied
to check the further progress of the Greeks by corrupting
their cleverest statesmen; and, submitting himself to the gov-
ernment of women and eunuchs, lost all manliness of char-
acter. His own indulgence in illicit amours caused violence
and bloodshed in his family, and his example encouraged a
similar profligacy in others. The bloody and licentious deeds
which stain the whole of the later Persian history commence
with Xerxes, who suffered the natural penalty of his follies
and his crimes when, after reigning twenty years, he was mur-
dered by the captain of his guard, Artabanus, and Aspamitres,
his chamberlain.

Artabanus placed on the throne the youngest son of Xerxes,
Artaxerxes I., called by the Greeks Macrocheir, or " the Long-
handed." The eldest son, Darius, accused by Artabanus of
his father's assassination, was executed ; the second, Hystaspes,
who was satrap of Bactria, claimed the crown; and, attempt-
ing to enforce his claim, was defeated and slain in battle. About
the same time the crimes of Artabanus were discovered, and
he was put to death.

ANCIENT HISTORY 87

Artaxerxes then reigned quietly for nearly forty years. He
was a mild prince, possessed of several good qualities; but
the weakness of his character caused a rapid declension of the
empire under his sway. The revolt of Egypt was indeed sup-
pressed after a while through the vigorous measures of the
satrap of Syria, Megabyzus; and the Athenians, who had fo-
mented it, were punished by the complete destruction of their
fleet, and the loss of almost all their men. But the cruelty and
perfidy shown in the execution of the captured Inarus must
have increased Egyptian disaffect-ion, while at the same time
it disgusted Megabyzus and the better class of Persians, and
became the cause of fresh misfortunes.

Bent on recovering her prestige, Athens, in B.C. 449, dis-
patched a fleet to the Levant, under Cimon, which sailed to
Cyprus and laid siege to Citium. There Cimon died; but the
fleet which had been under his orders attacked and completely
defeated a large Persian armament off Salamis, besides de-
taching a squadron to assist Amyrtaeus, who still held out in
the Delta. Persia, dreading the loss of Cyprus and Eg^pt,
consented to an inglorious peace. The independence of the
Asiatic Greeks was recognized. Persia undertook not to visit
with fleet or army the coasts of Western Asia Minor, and
Athens agreed to abstain from attacks on Cyprus and Egypt.
The Greek cities ceded by this treaty — the " peace of Callias "
— to the Athenian confederacy included all those from the
mouth of the Hellespont to Phaselis in Lycia, but did not in-
clude the cities on the shores of the Black Sea.

Scarcely less damaging to Persia was the revolt of Mega-
byzus, which followed. This powerful noble, disgusted at the
treatment of Inarus, which was contrar>' to his pledged word,
excited a rebellion in Syria, and so alarmed Artaxerxes that
he was allowed to dictate the terms on which he would con-
sent to be reconciled to his sovereign. An example was thus
set of successful rebellion on the part of a satrap, which could
not but have disastrous consequences. The prestige of the
central government was weakened; and provincial governors
were tempted to throw oflF their allegiance on any fair occa-
sion that offered itself; since, if successful, they had nothing
to fear, and in any case they might look for pardon.

88 RAWLINSON

The disorders of the court continued, and, indeed, increased,
under Artaxerxes I., who allowed his mother Amestris, and
his sister Amytis, who was married to Megabyzus, to indulge
freely the cruelty and licentiousness of their dispositions.
Artaxerxes died B.C. 425, and left his crown to his only le-
gitimate son, Xerxes II.

Revolutions in the government now succeeded each other
with great rapidity. Xerxes II., after reigning forty-five days,
was assassinated by his half-brother, Secydianus or Sogdianus,
an illegitimate son of Artaxerxes, who seized the throne, but
was murdered in his turn, after a reign of six months and a
half, by another brother, Ochus.

Ochus, on ascending the throne, took the name of Darius,
and is known in history as Darius Nothus. He was married
to Parysatis, his aunt, a daughter of Xerxes I., and reigned
nineteen years, B.C. 424 to 404, under her tutelage. His reign,
though checkered with some gleams of sunshine, was on the
whole disastrous. Revolt succeeded to revolt; and, though
most of the insurrections were quelled, it was at the cost of
what remained of Persian honor and self-respect. Corrup-
tion was used instead of force against the rebellious armies;
and the pledges freely given to the leaders in order to pro-
cure their submission were systematically disregarded. Arsites,
the king's brother, his fellow-conspirator, a brother of Mega-
byzus, and Pissuthnes, the satrap of Lydia, were successively
entrapped in this way, and suffered instant execution. So
low had the feeling of honor sunk, that Pissuthnes's captor,
Tissaphernes, instead of showing indignation, like Megabyzus,
accepted the satrapy of his victim, and thus made himself a
participant in his sovereign's perfidy.

Still more dangerous to the State, if less disgraceful, were
the practices which now arose of uniting commonly the offices
of satrap and commander of the forces, and of committing to
a single governor two, or even three, satrapies. The authority
of the Crown was relaxed; satraps became practically uncon-
trolled; their lawless acts were winked at or condoned; and
their governments tended more and more to become hereditary
fiefs — ^the first step, in empires like the Persian, to disintegra-
tion.

ANCIENT HISTORY 89

The revolts of satraps were followed by national outbreaks,
which, though sometimes quelled, were in other instances suc-
cessful. In B.C. 408, the Medes, who had patiently acquiesced
in Persian rule for more than a century, made an eflfort to
shake off the yoke, but were defeated and reduced to subjec-
tion. Three years later, B.C. 405, Egypt once more rebelled,
under Nepherites, and succeeded in establishing its indepen-
dence. (See Book I., Part II.) The Persians were expelled
from Africa, and a native prince seated himself on the throne
of the Pharaohs.

It was some compensation for this loss, and perhaps for
others towards the north and north-east of the empire, that
in Asia Minor the authority of the Great King was once more
established over the Greek cities. It was the Peloponnesian
War, rather than the peace of Callias, which had prevented
any collision between the great powers of Europe and Asia
for thirty-seven years. Both Athens and Sparta had their
hands full ; and though it might have been expected that
Persia would have at once taken advantage of the quarrel to
reclaim at least her lost continental dominion, yet she seems
to have refrained, through moderation or fear, until the Athe-
nian disasters in Sicily encouraged her to make an effort. She
then invited the Spartans to Asia, and by the treaties which
she concluded with them, and the aid which she gave them,
re-acquired without a struggle all the Greek cities of the coast.
It was her policy, however, not to depress Athens too much —
a policy which was steadily pursued, till the personal ambition
of the younger Cyrus caused a departure from the line dictated
by prudence.

The progress of corruption at court kept pace with the gen-
eral decline which may be traced in all parts of the empire.
The power of the eunuchs increased, and they began to aspire,
not only to govern the monarch, but actually to seat themselves
upon the throne. Female influence more and more directed
the general course of affairs ; and the vices of conscious weak-
ness, perfidy and barbarity came to be looked upon as the
mainstays of government.

Darius Nothus died B.C. 405, and was succeeded by his
eldest son, Arsaces, who on his accession took the name of

RAWLINSON

Artaxerxes. Artaxerxes II., called by the Greeks Mnemon
on account of the excellence of his memory, had from the very
first a rival in his brother Cyrus. Parysatis had endeavored
to gain the kingdom for her younger son, while the succession
was still open; and when her efforts failed, and Artaxerxes
was named to succeed his father, she encouraged Cyrus to
vindicate his claim by arms. It would undoubtedly have been
advantageous to Persia that the stronger-minded of the two
brothers should have been the victor in the struggle ; but the
fortune of war decided otherwise. Cyrus fell at Cunaxa, a
victim to his own impetuosity; and Artaxerxes II. obtained
undisputed possession of the throne, which he held for above
forty years.

The expedition of Cyrus produced a complete change in the
relations between Persia and Sparta. Sparta had given Cyrus
important assistance, and thereby irremediably offended the
Persian monarch. The result of the expedition encouraged
her to precipitate the rupture which she had provoked. Hav-
ing secured the services of the Ten Thousand, she attacked
the Persians in Asia Minor ; and her troops, under Thimbron,
Dercyllidas, and Agesilaiis, made the Persians tremble for their
Asiatic dominion. Wisely resolving to find her enemy em-
ployment at home, Persia brought about a league between the
chief of the secondary powers of Greece — Argos, Thebes,
Athens, and Corinth — supplying them with the sinews of war,
and contributing a contingent of ships, which at once turned
the scale, and by the battle of Cnidus, B.C. 394, gave the mas-
tery of the sea to the confederates. Agesilaiis was recalled to
Europe, and Sparta found herself so pressed that she was glad
to agjee to the peace known as that of Antalcidas, whereby
the Greeks of Europe generally relinquished to Persia their
Asiatic brethren, and allowed the Great King to assume the
part of authoritative arbiter in the Grecian quarrels, B.C. 387.

Glorious as the peace of Antalcidas was for Persia, and satis-
factory as it must have been to her to see her most formidable
enemies engaged in internecine conflict one with another, yet
the internal condition of the empire showed no signs of im-
provement. The revolt of Evagoras, Greek tyrant of Salamis
in Cyprus, was with difficulty put down, after a long and doubt-

ANCIENT HISTORY 91

ful struggle, B.C. 391 to 379, in which disaflFection was exhib-
ited by the Phoenicians, the Cilicians, the Carians, and the
Idumaean Arabs. The terms made with Evagoras were a con-
fession of weakness, since he retained his sovereignty, and
merely consented to pay the Persian king an annual tribute.

The revolt of the Cadusians on the shores of the Caspian
about this same period, B.C. 384, gave Artaxerxes II. an op-
portunity of trying his own qualifications for military com-
mand. The trial was unfavorable; for he was only saved
from disaster by the skill of Tiribazus, one of his officers,
who procured with consummate art the submission of the
rebels.

Artaxerxes, however, proud of the success which might be
said, on the whole, to have attended his arms, was not content
with the mere recovery of newly-revolted provinces, but as-
pired to restore to the empire its ancient limits. His generals
commenced the reduction of the Greek islands by the occupa-
tion of Samos; and in B.C. 375, having secured the services
of the Athenian commander, Iphicrates, he sent a great expe-
dition against Egypt, which was intended to reconquer that
country. Iphicrates, however, and Phamabazus, the Persian
commander, quarrelled. The expedition wholly failed; and
the knowledge of the failure provoked a general spirit of dis-
affection in the western satrapies, which brought the empire
to the verge of destruction. But corruption and treachery,
now the usual Persian weapons, were successful once more.
Orontes and Rheomithras took bribes to desert their confed-
erates; Datames was entrapped and executed. An attempt
of Egypt, favored by Sparta, and promoted by Agesilaiis in
person, B.C. 361, to annex Phoenicia and Syria, was frustrated
by internal commotions, and the reig^ of Artaxerxes closed
without any further contraction of the Persian territory.

The court continued during the reign of Artaxerxes II. a
scene of horrors and atrocities of the same kind that had pre-
vailed since the time of Xerxes I. Parj-satis, the queen-
mother, was its presiding spirit ; and the long catalogue of her
cruel and bloody deeds is almost without a parallel even in the
history of Oriental despotisms. The members of the royal
household became now the special objects of jealousy to one

RAWLINSON

another; family affection had disappeared; and executions,
assassinations, and suicides decimated the royal stock.

Ochus, the youngest legitimate son of Artaxerxes II., who
had obtained the throne by the execution of his eldest and the
suicide of his second brother, assumed on his accession (B.C.
359) the name of his father, and is known as Artaxerxes III.
He was a prince of more vigor and spirit than any monarch
since Darius Hystaspis ; and the power, reputation, and gen-
eral prosperity of the empire were greatly advanced under his
administration. The court, however, was incurably corrupt;
and Ochus can not be said to have at all improved its condition.
Rather, it was a just Nemesis by which, after a reign of twenty-
one years, B.C. 359 to 338, he fell a victim to a conspiracy of
the seraglio.

The first step taken by the new king was the complete de-
struction of the royal family, or, at any rate, of all but its more
remote branches. Having thus secured himself against rivals,
he proceeded to arrange and execute some important enter-
prises.

The revolt of Artabazus in Asia Minor, fomented at first
by Athens, and afterwards by Thebes, was important both as
delaying the grand enterprise of Ochus, and as leading to the
first betrayal of a spirit inimical to Persia, on the part of Philip
of Macedon. Philip received Artabazus as a refugee at his
court, and thus provoked those hostile measures to which
Ochus had recourse later in his reign — measures which fur-
nished a ground of complaint to Alexander.

About B.C. 351, Ochus marched a large army into Egypt,
bent on recovering that province to the empire. Nectanebo,
however, the Egyptian king, met him in the field, defeated him,
and completely repulsed his expedition. Ochus returned to
Persia to collect fresh forces, and immediately the whole of the
West was in a flame. Phoenicia reclaimed her independence,
and placed herself under the government of Tennes, king of
Sidon. Cyprus revolted, and set up nine native sovereigns.
In Asia Minor a dozen petty chieftains assumed the airs of
actual monarchs. Ochus, however, nothing daunted, em-
ployed his satraps to quell or check the revolts, while he him-
self collected a second armament, obtained the services of

ANCIENT HISTORY

Greek generals, and hired Greek mercenaries to the number
of 10,000. He then proceeded in person against Phoenicia and
Egypt, B.C. 346.

Partly by force, but mainly by treachery, Sidon was taken
and Phoenicia reduced to subjection; Mentor, with 4,000
Greeks, deserting and joining the Persians. Egypt was then
a second time invaded; Nectanebo was defeated and driven
from the country ; and the Egyptian satrapy was recovered.
The glory which Ochus thus acquired was gjeat ; but the value
of his success, as an indication of reviving Persian vigor, was
diminished by the fact that it was mainly owing to the conduct
of Greek generals and the courage of Greek mercenaries. Still,
to Bagoas, the eunuch, and to Ochus himself, some of the credit
must be allowed ; and the vigorous administration which fol-
lowed on the Egfvptian campaign gave promise of a real recov-
ery of pristine force and strength. But this prospect was soon
clouded by a fresh revolution in the palace, which removed the
most capable of the later Achaemenian monarchs.

A savage cruelty was one of the most prominent features in
the character of Ochus; and his fierceness and violence had
rendered him unpopular with his subjects, when the eunuch
Bagoas, his chief minister, ventured on his assassination, B.C.
338. Bagoas placed Arses, the king's youngest son, upon the
throne, and destroyed the rest of the seed royal. It was his
object to reign as minister of a prince who was little more than
a boy ; but after two years he grew alarmed at some threats
that Arses had uttered, and secured himself by a fresh murder.
Not venturing to assume the vacant crown himself, he con-
ferred it on a friend, named Codomannus — perhaps descended
from Darius II. — who mounted the throne under the title of
Darius III., and immediately put to death the wretch to whom
he owed his elevation, B.C. 336.

Superior morally to the greater number of his predecessors,
Darius III. did not possess sufficient intellectual ability to en-
able him to grapple with the difficulties of the circumstances
in which he was placed. The Macedonian invasion of Asia,
which had commenced before he mounted the throne, failed
to alarm him as it ought to have done. He probably despised
Alexander's youth and inexperience ; at any rate, it is certain

94 RAWLINSON

that he took no sufficient measures to guard his country
against the attack with which it was threatened. Had Per-
sia joined the European enemies of Alexander in the first
year of his reign, the Macedonian conquest of Asia might
never have taken place. Still, Darius was not wholly want-
ing to the occasion. An important native and mercenary
force was collected in Mysia to oppose the invader, if he should
land ; and a large fleet was sent to the coast, which ought to
have made the passage of the Hellespont a matter of difficulty.
But the remissness and over-confidence of the Persian leaders
rendered these measures ineffectual. Alexander's landing was
unopposed, and the battle of the Granicus (B.C. 334), which
might have been avoided, caused the immediate loss of all
Asia Minor. Soon afterwards, the death of Memnon deprived
Darius of his last chance of success by disconcerting all his
plans for the invasion of Europe. Compelled to act wholly
on the defensive, he levied two great armies, and fought two
great battles against his foe. In the first of these, at Issus
(B.C. 333), he no doubt threw away all chance of victory by
engaging his adversary in a defile ; but in the second all the
advantages that nature had placed on the side of the Persians
were given full play. The battle of Arbela (Oct. i, B.C. 331),
fought in the broad plains of Adiabene, on ground carefully
selected and prepared by the Persians, fairly tested the relative
strength of the two powers ; and when it was lost, the empire
of Persia came naturally to an end. The result of the contest
might have been predicted from the time of the battle of Mara-
thon. The inveterate tendency of Greece to disunion, and the
liberal employment of Persian gold, had deferred a result that
could not be prevented, for nearly two centuries.*

* For the details of the Greek wars with Persia, see Book III., Third
Period ; and for those of the war between Darius and Alexander, see
Book IV., First Period.

BOOK III
HISTORY OF GREECE

HELEN OF TROY.

From the original painting W Sir Frederick Leigbion.

BOOK III

HISTORY OF THE GRECIAN STATES FROM THE EARLI-
EST TIMES TO THE ACCESSION OF ALEXANDER.

GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE.

Hellas, or Greece Proper, is a peninsula of moderate size,
bounded on the north by Olympus, the Cambunian moun-
tains, and an artificial line prolonged westward to the Acroce-
raunian promontory; on the west by the Adriatic or Ionian
Gulf; on the south by the Mediterranean; and on the east
by the /Egean Sea. Its greatest length from north to south,
between the Cambunian mountains and Cape Taenarus, is
about 250 English miles ; its greatest width, between the Acro-
ceraunian promontory and the mouth of the Peneus, or ag^in
between the coast of Acamania and Marathon in Attica, is
about 180 miles. Its superficial extent has been estimated at
35,000 square miles, which is somewhat less than the size of
Portugal.

The geographical features which most distinctly characterize
the Hellenic Peninsula are the number of its mountains and
the extent of its sea-board. Numerous deep bays strongly in-
dent the coast, while long and narrow promontories run out
far into the sea on all sides, causing the proportion of coast
to area to be very much greater than is found in any other
country of Southern Europe. Excellent harbors abound ; the
tideless sea has few dangers ; off the coast lie numerous littoral
islands of great beauty and fertility. Nature has done her
utmost to tempt the population to maritime pursuits, and to
make them cultivate the art of navigation. Communication
between most parts of the country is shorter and easier by sea
than by land; for the mountain-chains which intersect the
Vou I.— 7 97

98 RAWLINSON

region in all directions are for the most part lofty and rugged,
traversable only by a few passes, often blocked by snow in
the winter-time.

The Mountain-system of Greece may best be regarded as
an offshoot from the great European chain of the Alps. At
a point a little to the west of the 2ist degree of longitude (E.
from Greenwich), the Albanian Alps throw out a spur, which,
under the names of Scardus, Pindus, Corax, Taphiassus, Pana-
chaicus, Lampea, Pholoe, Parrhasius, and Taygetus, runs in
a direction a little east of south from the 42d parallel to the
promontory of Taenarum. From this great longitudinal chain
are thrown out, at brief intervals on either side, a series of
lateral branches, having a general latitudinal direction ; from
which again there start ofif other cross ranges, which follow
the course of the main chain, or backbone of the region, point-
ing nearly south-east. The latitudinal chains are especially
marked and important in the eastern division of the country,
between Pindus and the ^gean. Here are thrown off, suc-
cessively, the Cambunian and Olympic range, which formed
the northern boundary of Greece Proper ; the range of Othrys,
which separated Thessaly from Malis and ^niania; that of
(Eta, which divided between Malis and Doris; and that of
Parnassus, Helicon, Cithaeron, and Parnes, which, starting
from near Delphi, terminated in the Rhamnusian promontory,
opposite Euboea, forming in its eastern portion a strong bar-
rier between Boeotia and Attica. Of a similar character on the
opposite side were Mount Lingus in Northern Epirus, which
struck westward from Pindus at a point nearly opposite the
Cambunians ; together with Mount Tymphrestus in Northern,
and Mount Bomius in Central ^tolia. In the Peloponnese,
the main chain, which stretched from Rhium to Taenarum,
threw off, on the west. Mount Scollis, which divided Achaea
from Elis, and Mount Elaeon, which separated Elis from Mes-
senia ; while, towards the east, the lateral branches were, first,
one which, under the names of Erymanthus, Aroania, and Cyl-
lene, divided Achaea from Arcadia, and which was then pro-
longed eastward to the Scyllaean promontory in Argolis ; and,
secondly. Mount Parthenium, which intervened between Ar-
golis and Laconia. Of secondary longitudinal chains the only

ANCIENT HISTORY 99

ones which need special mention are the range of PeHon and
Ossa, which shut in Thessaly on the east ; that of Pentelicus,
Hymettus, and Anhydrus, in Attica; and that of Pamon in
the Peloponnese, which stretched from near Tegea to Malea.

The Mountain-chains of Greece occupy so large a portion
of the area that but little is left for level ground or plains. Still,
a certain number of such spaces existed, and were the more
valued for their rarity. The greater portion of Thessaly was
a vast plain, surrounded by mountains, and drained by a single
river, the Peneus. In Boeotia there were two large plains, one
the marshy plain of the Cephissus, much of which was occu-
pied by Lake Copais ; and the other, the plain of Asopus, on
the verge of which stood Thebes, Thespiae, and Plataea. Attica
boasted of three principal plains, that of Eleusis, adjoining the
city of the name, that of Athens itself, and that of Marathon.
In Western and Southern Peloponnese were the lowlands of
Cava Elis on either side of the Peneus river, of Macaria, about
the mouth of the Pamisus, and of Helos, at the embouchure
of the Eurotas ; in the central region were the high upland
plains, or basins, of Tegea, Mantinea, Pheneus, and Orchome-
nus; while Eastern Peloponnese boasted the fertile alluvium
of Argos, watered by the Chimarrhus, Erasinus, Phrixus,
Charadrus, and Inachus.

The Rivers of Greece were numerous, but of small volume,
the majority being little more than winter torrents, and carry-
ing little or no water in the summer-time. The only streams
of any real magnitude were the Acheloiis, which rose in Epirus,
and divided ^tolia from Acarnania; the northern Peneus,
which drained the great Thessalian plain; and the Alpheus,
the stream on whose banks stood Olympia. Among secondary
rivers may be noticed the Thyamis, Oropus, and Arachthus,
in Epirus; the Evenus and Daphnus, in /Etolia; the Spcr-
cheius, in Malis ; the Cephissus and Asopus, in Boeotia ; the
Peneus, Pamisus, Eurotas, and Inachus, in the Peloponnese.

It is a characteristic of the Grecian rivers to disappear in
Catabothra or subterraneous passages. The limestone rocks
are full of caves and fissures, while the plains consist often of
land-locked basins which present to the eye no manifest outlet.
Here the streams commonly form lakes, the waters of which

loo RAWLINSON

flow off through an underground channel, sometimes visible,
sometimes only conjectured to exist, to the sea. Instances of
such visible outlets are those by which the Cephissus finds an
egress from Lake Copais, in Boeotia (where art, however, has
assisted nature), and those by which the superfluous waters
are carried ofif from most of the lakes in the Peloponnese.
Invisible channels are believed to give a means of escape to
the waters of Lakes Hylice and Trephia, in Boeotia.

The Lakes of Greece are numerous, but not very remark-
able. The largest is Lake Copais, in Boeotia, the area of which
has been estimated at forty-one square miles. Next in size to
this is, probably, Boebeis, in Thessaly, formed mainly by the
overflowings of the Peneus. To these may be added Lake
Pambotis, in Epirus, on the southern shores of which was the
oracular shrine of Dodona ; Lakes Trichonis and Conope, in
./Etolia, between the Evenus and Acheloiis; Lake Nessonis,
near Lake Boebeis, in Thessaly ; Lake Xynias, in Achaea
Phthiotis; the smaller Boeotian lakes, Hylice and Trephia;
and the Arcadian lakes of Pheneus, Stymphalus, Orchomenus,
Mantinea, and Tegea.

It has been observed that the littoral islands of Greece were
both numerous and important. The principal one was Euboea,
which lay as a great breakwater along the whole east coast of
Attica, Boeotia, and Locris, extending in length rather more
than lOO miles, with an average breadth of about fifteen miles.
Very inferior to this in size, but nearly equal in importance,
was Corcyra, on the opposite or western side of the peninsula,
which had a length of forty, and a breadth varying from fifteen
to five miles. Besides these, there lay off the west coast Paxos,
Leucas or Leucadia, Ithaca, Cephallenia, and Zacynthus (now
Zante) ; off the south, the CEnussae and Cythera ; off the east,
Tiparenus, Hydria, Calauria, ^gina, Salamis, Cythnus, Ceos,
Helene, Andros, Scyros, Peparethus, Halonnesus, and Scia-
thus. From the south-eastern shores of Euboea and Attica,
the Cyclades and Sporades extended in a continuous series,
like a set of stepping-stones, across the .^gean Sea to Asia.
On the other side, from Corcyra and the Acroceraunian prom-
ontory, the eye could see, on a clear day, the opposite coast
of Italy.

ANCIENT HISTORY loi

The natural division of Greece is into Northern, Central,
and Southern. Northern Greece extends from the north boun-
dary-Hne to the point where the eastern and western shores
are respectively indented by the Gulfs of Malis and Ambracia
or Actiuni. Central Greece reaches from this point to the Isth-
mus of Corinth. Southern Greece is identical with the Pelo-
ponnese.

Northern Greece contained in ancient times two principal
countries, Thessaly and Epirus, which were separated from
each other by the high chain of Pindus. Besides these, there
were, on the eastern side of the mountain barrier, Magnesia
and Achaea Phthiotis ; and in the mountain region itself, half-
way between the two gulfs, Dolopia, or the country of the
Dolopes.

Thessaly, the largest and most fertile country of Greece
Proper, was almost identical with the basin of the Peneus.
It was a region nearly circular in shape, with a diameter of
about seventy miles. Mountains surrounded it on every side,
from which descended numerous streams, all of them converg-
ing, and flowing ultimately into the Peneus. The united waters
passed to the sea through a single narrow gorge, the celebrated
vale of Tempe, which was said to have been caused by an
earthquake. Thessaly was divided into four provinces: —
(a) Perrhsebia on the north, along the skirts of Olympus and
the Cambunians; (b) Histiaeotis, towards the west, on the
flanks of Pindus, and along the upper course of the Peneus;
(c) Thessaliotis, towards the south, bordering on Achaea Phthi-
otis and Dolopia; and (d) Pelasgiotis, towards the east, be-
tween the Enipeus and Magnesia. Its chief cities were, in
Perrhaebia, Gonni and Phalanna; in Histiaeotis, Gomphi and
Tricca ; in Thessaliotis, Cierium and Pharsalus ; in Pelasgio-
tis, Larissa and Pherae.

Epirus, the next largest country to Thessaly, was in shape
an oblong square, seventy miles long from north to south, and
about fifty-five miles across. It consisted of a series of lofty
mountains, twisted spurs from Pindus, with narrow valleys
between, along the courses of the numerous streams. The
main divisions were — on the east, Molossis ; chief cities. Do-
dona, Ambracia : to the north-west, Chaonia ; cities, Phoenic6,

102 RAWLINSON

Buthrotum, Cestx-ia: to the south-west, Thesprotia; cities,
Pandosia, Cassope, and in later times, Nicopolis. Epirus, dur-
ing the real historical period, was Illyrian rather than Greek,

Magnesia and Achaea Phthiotis are sometimes reckoned as
parts of Thessaly; but, in the early times, at any rate, they
were distinct countries. Magnesia was the coast-tract between
the mouth of the Peneus and the Pagasaean Gulf, comprising
the two connected ranges of Ossa and Pelion, with the country
immediately at their base. It measured in length about sixty-
five, and in width from ten to fifteen miles. Its chief cities
were Myrae, Meliboea, and Casthansea upon the eastern coast;
lolcus, in the Gulf of Pagasae ; and Bcebe, near Lake Bcebeis,
in the interior. Achaea Phthiotis was the tract immediately
south of Thessaly, extending from the Pagasaean Gulf on the
east to the part of Pindus inhabited by the Dolopes. It was
a region nearly square in shape, each side of the square meas-
uring about thirty miles. It consisted of Mount Othrys, with
the country at its base. The chief cities were Halos, Thebae
Phthiotides, Itonus, Melitaea, Lamia, and Xyniae, on Lake
Xynias.

Dolopia, or the country of the Dolopes, comprised a portion
of the range of Pindus, together with the more western part
of Othrys, and the upper valleys of several streams which ran
into the Acheloiis. It was a small tract, not more than forty
miles long by fifteen broad, and was very rugged and moun-
tainous.

Central Greece, or the tract intervening between Northern
Greece and the Peloponnese, contained eleven countries ; viz.,
Acarnania, .^tolia. Western Locris, ^niania, Doris, Malis,
Eastern Locris, Phocis, Boeotia, Attica, and Megaris.

Acarnania, the most western of the countries, was a trian-
gfular tract, bounded on the north by the Ambracian Gulf, on
the east by the Acheloiis, and on the south-west by the Adri-
atic. Its sides measured respectively fifty, thirty-five, and
thirty miles. Its chief cities were, in the interior. Stratus;
on the coast, Anactorium, Solium, Astacus, and CEniadae.

.-^tolia adjoined Acarnania on the east, and extended in
that direction as far as ^niania and Doris. On the north it
was bounded by Dolopia ; on the south by the Corinthian Gulf.

ANCIENT HISTORY

103

In size it was about double Acamania, and its area considerably
exceeded that of any other country in this part of Hellas. It
was generally mountainous, but contained a fiat and marshy
tract between the mouths of the Evenus and Acheloiis; and
somewhat farther to the north, a large plain, in which were
two gjeat lakes, the Conope and the Trichonis. Its chief cities
were Pleuron, Calydon, and Thermon.

Western Locris, or the country of the Locri Ozolae, lay on
the coast of the Corinthian Gulf, immediately to the east of
iEtolia. Its length along the coast was about thirty-seven
miles, and its depth inland from about two miles to twenty-
three. Its chief cities were Naupactus on the coast, and Am-
phissa in the interior.

iEniania, or JEtxa., as it was sometimes called, lay also east
of i^tolia, but towards the north, whereas Locris adjoined it
towards the south, ^niania was separated from ^tolia by
the continuation of Pindus southward, and was bounded on
the north by Othrys and on the south by CEta. It lay thus on
the course of the upper Spercheius River. It was an oval-
shaped country, about twenty-seven miles long by eighteen
broad. The chief town was Hypata.

Doris intervened between ^Eniania and Western Locris.
This was a small and rugged country, inclosed between Mounts
Parnassus and Callidromus, on the upper course of the Pindus
River, a tributary of the Boeotian Cephissus. Its greatest
length was about seventeen and its greatest width about ten
miles. It contained the four cities of Pindus, Erineus, Boeum,
and Cytinium, whence it was known as the Dorian Tetrapolis.

Malis lay north of Doris, south of Achaea Phthiotis, and
cast of i^niania. It was even smaller than Doris, which it
resembled in shape. The greatest length was about fifteen
and the greatest width about eight miles. The chief cities
were Anticyra and Trachis; and, in later times, Heraclea.
At the extreme eastern edge of Malis, between the mountains
and the sea, was the pass of Thermopylae.

Eastern Locris lay next to Malis, along the shore of the
Euripus or Euboean channel. It was politically divided into
two parts, Epicnemidia and Opuntia; which, in later times,
were physically separated by a small strip of ground, reckoned

104 RAWLINSON

as belonging to Phocis. Epicnemidia extended about seven-
teen miles, from near Thermopylae to near Daphnus, averaging
about eight miles in width. Its chief town was Cnemides.
Opuntia reached from Alope to beyond the mouth of the Ce-
phissus, a distance of twenty-six miles. Its width was about
equal to that of Epicnemidia. It derived its name from its
chief city, Opus.

Phocis reached from Eastern Locris on the north to the
Corinthian Gulf on the south. It was bounded on the west by
Doris and Western Locris, on the east by Boeotia. It was
squarish in shape, with an average length of twenty-five and
an average breadth of twenty miles. The central and southern
parts were extremely mountainous ; but along the course of
the Cephissus and its tributaries there were some fertile plains.
The chief cities were Delphi, on the southern flank of Mount
Parnassus, Elatsea, Parapotamii, Panopeus, Abae, famous for
its temple, and Hyampolis.

Boeotia was above twice the size of Phocis, having a length
of fifty and an average breadth of twenty-three miles. It was
generally flat and marshy, but contained the mountain range
of HeUcon on the south, and the lofty hills known as Ptoiis,
Messapius, Hypatus, and Teumessus, towards the more eastern
portion of the country. The lake Copais covered an area of
forty-one square miles, or above one-thirtieth of the surface.
There were also two smaller lakes between Copais and the
Eubcean Sea, called respectively Hylice and Trephia. The
chief rivers of Boeotia were (besides the Cephissus, which en-
tered it from Phocis) the Asopus, the Termessus, the Thes-
pius, and the Oeroe. Boeotia was noted for the number and
greatness of its cities. The chief of these was Thebes; but
the following were also of importance : Orchomenus, Thespiae,
Tanagra, Coronaea, Lebadeia, Haliartus, Chaeroneia, Leuctra,
and Copae.

Attica was the foreland or peninsula which projected from
Boeotia to the south-east. Its length, from Cithaeron to Su-
nium, was seventy miles; its greatest width, from Munychia
to Rhamnus, was thirty miles. Its area has been estimated at
720 square miles, or about one-fourth less than Boeotia. The
general character of the tract was mountainous and infertile.

ANCIENT HISTORY 105

On the north, Cithaeron, Fames, and Phelleus formed a con-
tinuous Une running nearly east and west ; from this descend-
ed three spurs: one, which divided Attica from the Megarid,
known as Kerata; another, which separated the Eleusinian
from the Athenian plain, called iEgaleos ; and the third, which
ran out from Fames by Decelea and Marathon to Cape Zoster,
named in the north Pentelicus, in the centre Hymettus, and
near the south coast Anhydrus. The towns of Attica, except
Athens, were unimportant. Its rivers, the two Cephissuses,
the Ilissus, the Erasinus, and the Charadrus, were little more
than torrent-courses.

Megaris, which adjoined on Attica to the west, occupied
the northern portion of the Isthmus uniting Central Greece
with the Peloponnese. It was the smallest of all the central
Greek countries, excepting Doris and Malis, being about four-
teen miles long by eleven broad, and containing less than 150
square miles. It had one city only, viz., Megara, with the
ports Nisaea and Pegfae.

Southern Greece, or the Peloponnese, contained eleven
countries — viz., Corinth, Sicyon, Achaea, Elis, Arcadia, Mes-
senia, Laconia, Argolis, Epidauria, Troezenia, and Hermionis.

The territory of Corinth adjoined Megaris, and included the
larger portion of the Isthmus, together with a tract of some-
what greater magnitude in the Peloponnese. Its greatest
length was twenty-five and its greatest width about twenty-
three miles. Its shape, however, was extremely irregular ; and
its area can not be reckoned at more than 230 square miles.
The only city of importance was Corinth, the capital, which had
a port on either sea — on the Corinthian Gulf, Lechaeum, and
on the Saronic Gulf, Cenchreae.

Sicyon, or Sicyonia, adjoined Corinth on the west. It lay
along the shore of the Corinthian Gulf for a distance of about
fifteen miles, and extended inland about twelve or thirteen
miles. It contained but one city, viz., Sicyon.

Achaea came next to Sicyonia, and extended along the coast
a distance of about sixty-five miles. Its average width was
about ten miles ; and its area may be reckoned at 650 square
miles. It contained twelve cities, of which Dyme, Patrae (now
Patras), and Pellene were the most important.

io6 RAWLINSON

Elis lay on the west coast of the Peloponnese, extending
from the mouth of the Larisus to that of the Neda, a distance
of fifty-seven miles, and reaching inland to the foot of Ery-
manthus, about twenty-five miles. It was a more level country
than was common in Greece, containing broad tracts of plain
along the coast, and some tolerably wide valleys along the
courses of the Peneus, Alpheus, and Neda rivers. Its chief
cities were Elis, on the Peneus, the port Cyllene, on the gulf
of the same name, Olympia and Pisa, on the Alpheus, and
Lepreum, in Southern Elis or Triphylia.

Arcadia was the central mountain country — the Switzerland
— of the Peloponnese. It reached from the mountain-chain of
Erymanthus, Aroania, and Cyllene in the north, to the sources
of the Alpheus towards the south, a distance of about sixty
miles. The average width was about forty miles. The area
is reckoned at 1700 square miles. The country is for the most
part a mountainous table-land, the rivers of which, excepting
towards the west and the south-west, are absorbed in cata-
bothra, and have no visible outlet to the sea. High plains and
small lakes are numerous; but by far the greater part of the
area is occupied by mountains and narrow but fertile valleys.
Important cities were numerous. Among them may be named
Mantinea, Tegea, Orchomenus, Pheneus, Heraea, Psophis,
and, in the later times. Megalopolis.

Messenia lay south of Elis and Western Arcadia, occupying
the most westerly of the three forelands in which the Pelo-
ponnese terminates, and circling round the gulf between this
foreland and the central one as far as the mouth of the Chcerius.
Its length, from the Neda to the promontory of Acritas, was
forty-five miles; its greatest width between Laconia and the
western coast was thirty-seven miles. The area is estimated at
1 160 square miles. Much of the country was mountainous;
but along the course of the main river, the Pamisus, were some
broad plains, and the entire territory was fertile. The origi-
nal capital was Stenyclerus ; but afterwards Messene, on the
south-western flank of Mount Ithome, became the chief town.
Other important places were Eira on the upper Neda, Pylus
(now Navarino), and Methone, south of Pylus (now Modon).

Laconia embraced the two other Peloponnesian forelands,

ANCIENT HISTORY 107

together with a considerable tract to the north of them. Its
greatest length, between ArgoHs and the promontory of Malea,
was nearly eighty miles, while its greatest width was not much
short of fifty miles. The area approached nearly to 1900
square miles. The country consisted mainly of a single nar-
rowish valley — that of the Eurotas — inclosed between two
lofty mountain-ranges — those of Parnon and Taygetus. Hence
the expression, " Hollow Lacedaemon," Sparta, the capital,
lay on the Eurotas, at the distance of about twenty miles from
the sea. The other towns were unimportant; the chief were
Gythium and Thyrea on the coast, and Sellasia in the valley
of the ^nus.

Argolis is a term sometimes applied to the whole tract pro-
jecting eastward from Achaea and Arcadia, with the exception
of the small territory of Corinth: but the word will be here
used in a narrower sense. Argolis Proper was bounded by
Sicyonia and Corinthia on the north, by Epidaurus on the east,
by Cynuria — a portion of Laconia — on the south, and by Ar-
cadia on the west. Its greatest extent from north to south was
about thirty, and from east to west about thirty-one miles.
Its entire area did not exceed 700 square miles. Like the rest
of the Peloponnese, it was mountainous, but contained a large
and rich plain at the head of the Argolic Gulf. Its capital was,
in early times, Mycenae; afterwards Argos. Other cities of
importance were, Phlius, Cleonae, and Tiryns. The port of
Argos was Nauplia.

Epidauria lay east of Argolis, east and south of Corinthia.
Its length from north to south was about twenty-three miles,
and its breadth in the opposite direction about eight miles. It
contained but one city of any note, viz., Epidaurus, the capital.

Troezenia adjoined Epidauria on the south-east. It com-
prised the north-eastern half of the Argolic foreland, together
with the rocky peninsula of Methana. Its greatest length was
sixteen miles, and its greatest width, excluding Methana, nine
miles. It contained two cities of note, Troezen and Methana.

Hermionis adjoined Epidauria on the north and Trcezenia
on the east. It formed the western termination of the Argolic
foreland. In size it was about equal to Troezenia. It contained
but one town of any consequence, viz., Hermione.

io8 RAWLINSON

Besides the littoral islands of Greece, which have been al-
ready enumerated, there were several others, studding the
JEgezn Sea, which deserve notice ; as particularly the follow-
ing:— (a) In the Northern ^gean, Lemnos, Imbrus, Thasos,
and Samothrace. (b) In the Central ^Egean, besides Andros,
Ceos, and Cythnus, which may be called littoral, Tenos, Syros,
Gyarus, Delos, Myconus, Naxos, Paros, Siphnus, Melos,
Thera, Amorgus, etc. (c) In the Southern ^gean, Crete.
This last-named island was of considerable size. It extended
from west to east a distance of 150 miles, and had an average
width of about fifteen miles. The area considerably exceeded
2000 square miles. The chief cities were Cydonia and Gnos-
sus on the north coast, and Gortyna in the interior. The whole
island was mountainous but fertile.

On the character of the Greek Islands, see the work of

Ross, L., " Reisen auf den Griechischen Inseln." Stuttgart, 1840-52;
3 vols., 8vo.

On the general geography of Greece, the following may be
consulted with advantage:

Kruse, F. G. H., " Hellas." Leipsic, 1825-27; 3 vols., 8vo. A gen-
eral description of the geography of Greece from the best sources exist-
ing at the time. Still of value to the student.

Cramer, J. A., " Geographical and Historical Description of Ancient
Greece." Oxford, 1828; 3 vols., 8vo.

Leake, Col., "Travels in Northern Greece." London, 1835; 4 vols.,
8vo.

Leake, Col., " Travels in the Morea." London, 1830; 3 vols., 8vo.

Leake, Col., " Peloponnesiaca," supplemental to the " Travels in the
Morea." London, 1846; 8vo.

Curtius, E., " Peloponnesus." Gotha, 1851-52; 2 vols., 8vo.

Clark, W. G., " Peloponnesus, Notes of Study and Travel." Lon-
don, 1858; 8vo.

Niebuhr, B. G., " Lectures on the Ethnography and Geography of
Ancient Greece," edited by L. Schmitz. London, 1853; 2 vols., 8vo;
from the German edition of Dr. Isler.

ANCIENT HISTORY 109

SKETCH OF THE HISTORY.
FIRST PERIOD.

The Ancient Traditional History, from the Earliest Times to
the Dorian Occupation of the Peloponnese, about B.C. 1 100
to looo.*

The Greeks of the historical times seem to have had no tra-
ditions of a migration from Asia. Their ancestors, they held,
had always been in the country, though they had not always
been called Hellenes. Greece had been inhabited from a re-
mote age by races more or less homogeneous, and more or less
closely allied with their own — Pelasg^, Leleges, Curetes, Cau-
cones, Aones, Dolopes, Dryopes, and the like. Of these, the
Pelasgi had been the most important. The Hellenes proper
had originally been but one tribe out of many cognate ones.
They had dwelt in Achaea Phthiotis, or, according to others,
near Dodona, and had originally been insignificant in numbers

* Sources. Native only. Homer. — The two poems which pass under
this venerable name, whatever their actual origin, must always con-
tinue to be, on account of their great antiquity, the prime authority
for the early condition of things in Greece. Modern criticism agrees
with ancient in viewing them as the earliest remains of Greek literature
that have come down to us; and, if their actual date is about B.C. 850,
as now generally believed, they must be regarded as standing apart on
a vantage-ground of their own; for we have nothing else continuous
or complete in Greek literature for nearly four centuries. Herodotus.
— This writer, though the immediate subject of his history is the great
Persian War, yet carries us back in the episodical portions of his work
to very remote times, and is entitled to consideration as a careful in-
quirer into the antiquities of many nations, his own among the number.
Thucydides. — The sketch with which the history of Thucydides opens,
a masterly production, gives the judgment of a shrewd and well-read
Athenian of the fourth century B.C. on the antiquities of Greece.
Diodorus Siculus collected from previous writers, particularly Ephorus
and Timseus. the early traditional history of Greece, and related it in
his fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh books; of these the fourth and fifth
remain, while the other two are lost, excepting a few fragments. Much
interesting information on the early history of Greece is contained in
the geographers, as particularly in Strabo, Pausanias, and Scymnus
Chius. Of Plutarch's Lives one only, that of Theseus, belongs to the
early period.

1X0 RAWLINSON

and of small account. In process of time, however, they ac-
quired a reputation above that of the other tribes; recourse
was had to them for advice and aid in circumstances of diffi-
culty; other tribes came over to them, adopted their name,
their form of speech, and the general character of their civiliza-
tion. The growth and spread of the Hellenes was thus not by
conquest but by influence; they did not overpower or expel
the Pelasgi, Leleges, etc., but gradually assimilated them.

The original Hellenic tribes seem to have been two only,
the Dorians and the Achaeans, of whom the latter preponder-
ated in the more ancient times. Settled in Achaea Phthiotis
from a remote antiquity, they were also, before the Dorian
occupation, the leading race of the Peloponnese. Here they
are said to have had three kingdoms — those of Argos, My-
cenae, and Sparta — which attained to a considerable degree
of prosperity and civilization. The Dorians were reported to
have dwelt originally with the Achaeans in Phthiotis; but
their earliest ascertained locality was the tract on the Upper
Pindus which retained the name of Doris down to Roman
times. In this " small and sad region " they grew to greatness,
increasing in numbers, acquiring martial habits, and perhaps
developing a peculiar discipline.

The most important of the Pelasgic tribes was that of the
lonians, which occupied in the earliest times the whole north
coast of the Peloponnese, the Megarid, Attica, and Euboea.
Another (so-called) tribe (which is, however, perhaps, only
a convenient designation under which to include such inhabi-
tants of the country as were not Achaean, Dorian, or Ionian)
was that of the yEolians, to which the Thessalians, Boeotians,
Cohans, Locrians, Phocians, Eleans, Pylians, etc., were re-
garded as belonging. These races having been gradually Hel-
lenized, the entire four tribes came to be regarded as Hellenic,
and a mythic genealogy was framed to express at once the
ethnic unity and the tribal diversity of the four great divisions
of the Hellenic people.

Hellen.

I 1 1

Dorus. Xuthus. j^olus.

I ' -I

Achseus. Ion.

ANCIENT HISTORY in

According to the traditions of the Greeks, some important
foreign elements were received into the nation during the
period of which we are treating. Egyptians settled in Attica
andArgolis; Phoenicians in Boeotia ; and Mysians, or Phryg-
ians, at Argos. The civilization of the settlers was higher than
that of the people among whom they settled, and some con-
siderable benefits were obtained from these foreign sources.
Among them may be especially mentioned letters, which were
derived from the Phoenicians, probably anterior to B.C. iioo.
Although writing, for some centuries after its introduction,
was not much used, yet its occasional employment, especially
for public purposes, was an important check upon the erratic
tendencies of oral tradition. Inscriptions on the oflferings in
temples, and registers of the succession of kings and sacerdotal
persons, were among the earliest of the Greek historical doc-
uments ; and though there is no actual proof that they reached
back as far as this " First Period," yet there is certainly no
proof of the contrary, and many of the best critics believe in
the public employment of writing in Greece thus early.

But, whatever benefits were derived by the Greeks from
the foreigners who settled among them, it is evident that
neither the purity of their race, nor the general character and
course of their civilization, was much affected by extraneous
influences. The incomers were comparatively few in number,
and were absorbed into the Hellenic nation without leaving
any thing more than a faint trace of themselves upon the lan-
guage, customs, or religion of the people which received them
into its bosom. Greek civilization was in the main of home
growth. Even the ideas adopted from without acquired in the
process of reception so new a stamp as to become almost orig-
inal ; and the Greek people must be held to have, on the whole,
elaborated for themselves that form of civilization, and those
ideas on the subjects of art, politics, morals, and religion,
which have g^ven them their peculiar reputation.

History proper can scarcely be regarded as commencing
until the very close of the period now under consideration,
when we first meet with names which have some claim to be
regarded as those of actual personages. But the general con-
dition of the people at the period, and some of the movements

112 RAWLINSON

of the races, and even their causes, may be laid down with an
approach to certainty.

The Homeric poems represent to us the general state of Greek
society in the earliest times. The most noticeable features are :
— The predominance of the tribe or nation over the city,
which exists indeed, but has nowhere the monopoly of political
life. The universality of kingly government, which is heredi-
tary and based upon the notion of " divine right." The exist-
ence of an hereditary nobility of a rank not much below that
of the king, who form his council (ySouA,?;) both in peace and
war, but exercise no effectual control over his actions. The
existence of an assembly (ar/opa) which is convened by the
king, or, in his absence, by one of the chiefs, to receive com-
munications, and witness trials, but not either to advise or
judge. The absence of polygamy and the high regard in which
women are held. Slavery everywhere established, and consid-
ered to be right. Perpetual wars, not only between the Greeks
and neighboring barbarians, but between the various Greek
tribes and nations ; preference of the military virtues over all
others; excessive regard for stature and physical strength.
Wide prevalence of nautical habits combined with a disinclina-
tion to venture into unknown seas ; dependence of the Greeks
on foreigners for necessary imports. Piracy common; cities
built at a distance from the sea from fear of pirates. Strong
religious feeling; belief in polytheism, in fate, in the divine
Nemesis, and the punishment of heinous crimes by the Furies.
Respect for the priestly character, for heralds, guests, and sup-
pliants. Peculiar sanctity of temples and festival seasons.

The religious sentiment, always strong in the Greek mind,
formed in the early times one of the most important of the
bonds of union which held men, and even tribes, together.
Community of belief led to community of worship ; and tem-
ples came to be frequented by all the tribes dwelling around
them, who were thus induced to contract engagements with
one another, and to form leagues of a peculiar character. These
leagues, known as Amphictyonies, were not political alliances,
much less confederations ; they were, in their original concep-
tion, limited altogether to religious purposes ; the tribes, or
states, contracting them, bound themselves to protect certain

ANCIENT HISTORY 113

sacred buildings, rites, and persons, but undertook no other
engagements towards one another. The most noted of these
leagues was that whereof the oracular shrine of Delphi was
the centre ; which acquired its peculiar dignity and importance,
not so much from the wealth and influence of the Delphic
temple, as from the fact that among its twelve constituent
members were included the two leading races of Greece.

Important movements of some of the principal races seem
to have take place towards the close of the early period. It
may be suspected that these had their origin in the pressure
upon North-western Greece of the Illyrian people, the parent
(probably) of the modem Albanians. The tribes to the west
of Pindus were always regarded as less Hellenic than those
to the east ; and the ground of distinction seems to have been
the greater Illyrian element in that quarter. The Trojan War,
if a real event, may have resulted from the Illyrian pressure,
being an endeavor to obtain a vent for a population, cramped
for room, in the most accessible part of Asia. To the same
cause may be assigned the great movement which, commenc-
ing in Epirus (about B.C. 1200), produced a general shift of
the populations of Northern and Central Hellas. Quitting
Thesprotia in Epirus, the Thessalians crossed the Pindus
mountain-chain, and descending on the fertile valley of the
Peneus, drove out the Boeotians, and occupied it. The Boeo-
tians proceeded southward over Othrys and GEta into the plain
of the Cephissus, and driving out the Cadmeians and Minyans,
acquired the territory to which they thenceforth gave name.
The Cadmeians and Minyae dispersed, and are found in Attica,
in Laccdaemon, and elsewhere. The Dorians at the same time
moved from their old home and occupied Dryopis, which
thenceforward was known as Doris, expelling the Dryopians,
who fled by sea and found a refuge in Euboea, in Cythnus, and
in the Peloponnese.

Not many years later a further, but apparently distinct,
movement took place. The Dorians, cramped for room in
their narrow valleys between CEta and Parnassus, having allied
themselves with their neighbors, the i^tolians, crossed the
Corinthian Gulf at its narrowest point, between Rhium and
Antirrhium, and effected a lodgment in the Peloponnese. Elis,
Vol, I.— 8

114 RAWLINSON

Messenia, Laconia, and Argolis were successively invaded, and
at least partially conquered. Elis being assigned to the ^to-
lians, Dorian kingdoms were established in the three other
countries. The previous Achaean inhabitants in part submit-
ted, in part fled northward, and occupied the north coast of the
Peloponnese, dispossessing the lonians, who found a tempo-
rary refuge in Attica.

A further result followed from the migrations and conquests
here spoken of. The population of Greece, finding the conti-
nent too narrow for it, was forced to flow out into the islands
of the Mediterranean and the shores to which those islands
conducted. The Boeotian occupation of the plain of the Ce-
phissus led to the first Greek settlements in Asia, those known
as ^olian, in Lesbos and on the adjacent coast. The Achaean
conquest of Ionia caused the lonians, after a brief sojourn in
Attica, to pass on through the Cyclades, to Chios, Samos, and
the parts of Asia directly opposite. Finally, the success of the
Dorians against the Achseans caused these last to emigrate,
in part to Asia under Doric leaders, in part to Italy.

For the history of these settlements, see ^^^he following para-
graph.

SECOND PERIOD.

From the Dorian Conquest of the Peloponnese (about B.C.
iioo-iooo) to the Commencement of the Wars with Per*"
sia, B.C. 500.

Part I.
History of the principal Hellenic States in Greece Proper.

The history of the Hellenes subsequently to the Dorian oc-
cupation of the Peloponnese resolves itself into that of the
several states. Still, a few general remarks may be made
before proceeding to the special history of the more important
cities and countries. The progress of civilization was, for a
time and to a certain extent, checked by the migrations and
the troubles which they brought in their train. Stronger and
more energetic but ruder races took the place of weaker but
more polished ones. Physical qualities asserted a superiority
over g^ace, refinement, and ingenuity. What the rough Do-

ANCIENT HISTORY 115

rians were in comparison with the refined Achaeans of the Pelo-
ponnese, such were generally the conquering as compared with
the conquered peoples. But against this loss must be set the
greater political vigor of the new era. War and movement,
bringing out the personal qualities of each individual man,
favored the growth of self-respect and self-assertion. Amid
toils and dangers which were shared alike by all, the idea of
political equality took its rise. A novel and unsettled state
of things stimulated political inventiveness ; and, various ex-
pedients being tried, the stock of political ideas increased rap-
idly. The simple hereditary monarchy of the heroic times was
succeeded everywhere, except in Epirus, by some more com-
plicated system of government — some system far more favor-
able to freedom and to the political education of the individual.
Another natural consequence of the new condition of things
was the change by which the City acquired its special dignity
and importance. The conquerors naturally settled themselves
in some stronghold, and kept together for their greater secur-
ity. Each such stronghold became a separate state, holding in
subjection a certain tract of circumjacent country. At the
same time, the unconquered countries also, seeing the strength
that resulted from unity, were induced in many cases to abolish
their old system of village life and to centralize themselves by
establishing capitals, and transferring the bulk of their popu-
lation to them {<TvvoiKia-€t<;). This was the case with Athens,
Mantinea, Tegea, Dyme, etc. In countries occupied by a sin-
gle race, but broken up into many distinct states, each central-
ized in a single city, the idea of political confederation grew
up, sometimes (it may be) suggested by a pre-existing am-
phictyony, but occasionally, it would seem, without any such
preparative. The federal bond was in most cases weak ; and
in Boeotia alone was the union such as to constitute perma-
nently a state of first-rate importance.

The subdivision of Greece into a vast number of small
states, united by no common political bond, and constantly at
war with one another, did not prevent the formation and main-
tenance of a certain general Pan-Hellenic feeling — a conscious-
ness of unity, a friendliness, and a readiness to make common
cause against a foreign enemy. At the root of this feeling lay

ii6 RAWLINSON

a conviction of identity of race. It was further fostered by
the possession of a common language and a common Hterature ;
of similar habits and ideas ; and of a common religion, of rites,
temples, and festivals, which were equally open to all.

The first state which attained to poHtical importance under
the new condition of affairs in Greece was Argos. From Ar-
gos, according to the tradition, went forth the Dorian colonists,
who formed settlements in Epidaurus, Trcezen, Phlius, Sicyon,
and Corinth ; while from some of these places a further exten-
sion of Doric power was made, as from Epidaurus, which
colonized ^gina and Epidaurus Limera, and from Corinth,
which colonized Megara. Argos, the prolific mother of so
many children, stood to most of them in the relation of pro-
tectress, and almost of mistress. Her dominion reached, on
the one hand, to the Isthmus; on the other, to Cape Malea
and the island of Cythera. For three or four centuries, from
the Dorian conquest to the death of Pheidon (about B.C. 744),
she was the leading power of the Peloponnese, a fact which
she never forgot, and which had an important influence on her
later history.

The government of Argos was at the first a monarchy of the
heroic type, the supreme power being hereditary in the house
of the Temenidae, supposed descendants from Temenus the
Heracleid, the eldest of the sons of Aristomachus. It was not
long, however, before aspirations after political liberty arose,
and, the power of the kings being greatly curtailed, a govern-
ment, monarchical in form, but republican in reality, was es-
tablished. This state of things lasted for some centuries ; but
about B.C. 780 to 770, on the accession of a monarch of more
than ordinary capacity, a certain Pheidon, a reaction set in.
Pheidon not only recovered all the lost royal privileges, but,
exceeding them, constituted himself the first known Grecian
" tyrant." A great man in every way, he enabled Argos to
exercise something like a practical hegemony over the whole
Peloponnese. Under him, probably, were sent forth the col-
onies which carried the Argive name to Crete, Rhodes, Cos,
Cnidus, and Halicarnassus. The connection thus established
with Asia led him to introduce into Greece coined money — a
Lydian invention — and a system of weights and measures

ANCIENT HISTORY I17

{^€i£<i)peia tierpa) believed to have been identical with the
Babylonian.

After the death of Pheidon, Argos declined in power; the
ties uniting the confederacy became relaxed ; the government
returned to its previous form ; and the history of the state is
almost a blank. No doubt the development of Spartan power
was the main cause of this decline; but it may be attributed
also, in part, to the lack of eminent men, and in part to the
injudicious severity with which Argos treated her perioecic
cities and her confederates.

Among the other states of Greece, the two whose history is
most ample and most interesting, even during this early period,
are undoubtedly Sparta and Athens. Every " History of
Greece " must vainly concern itself with the affairs of these
two states, which are alone capable of being treated with any
thing like completeness.

History of Sparta.

The Dorians, who in the eleventh century eflfected a lodg-
ment in the upper valley of the Eurotas, occupied at first a
narrow space between Taygetus and Pamon, extending north-
ward no farther than the various head-streams of the Eurotas
and i^nus rivers, and southward only to a little beyond Sparta.
This was a tract about twenty-five miles long by twenty broad,
the area of which might be 400 square miles. In the lower
valley, from a little below Sparta to the sea, the Achseans still
maintained themselves, having their capital at Amyclae, on the
Eurotas, within two miles of the chief city of their enemies.
Perpetual war went on between the two powers ; but Sparta
for the space of three centuries made little or no advance
southward, Amyclae commanding the valley, and the fortifi-
cations of Amyclae defying her incessant attacks. Baffled in
this quarter, she made attempts to reduce Arcadia, which failed,
and even picRcd quarrels with her kindred states, Messenia
and Argos, which led to petty wars of no consequence.

The government of Sparta during this period underwent
changes akin to those which took place in Argos. The mon-
archs were at first absolute; but discontent soon manifested
itself : concessions were made which were again revoked ; and

ii8 RAWLINSON

the whole period was one of internal struggle and disturbance.
Nor were the differences between the kings and their Dorian
subjects the only troubles of the time. The submitted Achae-
ans, of whom there were many, were displeased at their treat-
ment, murmured and even sometimes revolted, and being re-
duced by force of arms were degraded to a lower position.

The double monarchy, which, according to the tradition, had
existed from the time of the conquest, and which was peculiar
to Sparta among all the Greek states, dated really, it is prob-
able, from the time of struggle, being a device of those who
sought to limit and curtail the royal authority. The two kings,
like the two consuls at Rome, acted as checks upon each other ;
and the regal power, thus divided against itself, naturally be-
came weaker and weaker. It had sunk, evidently, into a
shadow of its former self, when Lycurgus, a member of the
royal family, but not in the direct line of succession, gave to
Sparta that constitution which raised her in a little while to
a proud and wonderful eminence.

The adoption of the Lycurgean system had the almost imme-
diate effect of raising Sparta to the first place in Greece. Amy-
clae fell in the next generation to Lycurgus ; Pharis and Ge-
ronthrae submitted soon after. A generation later Helos was
taken, and the whole valley of the Eurotas occupied. The
Achaeans submitted, or retired to Italy. Wars followed with
Arcadia and Argos, the latter of whom lost all her territory
south of Cynuria. Quarrels began with Messenia, which led
on to a great struggle.

The conquest of Messenia by Sparta, which made her at
once the dominant power of the Peloponnese, was the result
of two great wars, each lasting about twenty years, and sepa-
rated from each other by the space of about forty years. The
wars seem to have been purely aggressive on the part of Sparta,
and to have been prompted, in part, by the mere lust of con-
quest, in part by dislike of the liberal policy which the Dorians
of Messenia had adopted towards their Achaean subjects. De-
spite the heroism of the Messenians and the assistance lent
them by Arcadia and Argos, Sparta gained her object, in con-
sequence of her superior military organization and training,
joined to the advantage of her central position, which enabled

ANCIENT HISTORY 119

her to strike suddenly with her full force any one of her three
foes.

Closely connected with the Messenian wars were certain
changes in the government and internal condition of Sparta,
the general tendency of which was towards popularizing the
constitution. The constant absence of the two kings from
Sparta during the Messenian struggle increased the power
of the Ephors, who, when no king was present, assumed that
to them belonged the exercise of the royal functions. The
loss of citizens in the wars led to the admission of new blood
into the state, and probably caused the distinction into two
classes of citizens (6/jLOIoI and inrofieiove^i ), which is found
to exist at a later date. The Ephors, elected annually by the
entire body of the citizens, became the popular element in the
government ; and the gradual augmentation of their power
was, in a certain sense, the triumph of the popular cause. At
the same time it must be allowed that the constitutional
changes made did not content the aspirations of the democratic
party ; and that the colony sent out to Tarentum at once indi-
cated, and relieved, the dissatisfaction of the lower grade of
citizens.

The conquest of Messenia was followed by some wars of less
importance, which tended, however, to increase the power of
Sparta, and to render her still more decidedly the leading state
of Greece. Pisatis and Triphylia were reduced directly after
the close of the second Messenian war, and were handed over
to the Eleans. Arcadia was then attacked, but made a vigorous
resistance ; and the sole fruit of a war which lasted three gen-
erations was the submission of Tegea. Argos about the same
time lost the Thyreatis (about B.C. 554) ; and Spartan influ-
ence was thus extended over, perhaps, two-thirds of the Pelo-
ponnese.

Hitherto the efforts and even the views of Sparta had been
confined to the narrow peninsula within which her own terri-
tory lay ; but the course of events now led her to a fuller recog-
nition of her own greatness, and, as a natural consequence, to
active exertions in a more extended sphere. The embassy of
Croesus in B.C. 555 was the first public acknowledgment which
she received of her importance ; and the readiness with which

I20 RAWLINSON

she embraced the offer of alliance, and prepared an expedition
to assist the Lydian monarch, indicates the satisfaction which
she felt in the new prospects which were opening out on her.
Thirty years later (B.C. 525), she actually sent an expedition,
conjointly with Corinth, to the coast of Asia, which failed,
however, to effect its object, the deposition of Poly crates of
Samos. Soon afterwards (B.C. 510), she assumed the right of
interference in the internal affairs of the Greek states beyond
the Peloponnese, and by her repeated invasions of Attica, and
her efforts in favor of the Athenian oligarchs, sowed the seeds
of that fear and dislike with which she was for nearly a century
and a half regarded by the great democratic republic.

History of Athens.

The traditional history of Athens commences with a Kingly
Period. Monarchs of the old heroic type are said to have gov-
erned the country from a time considerably anterior to the
Trojan War down to the death of Codrus, B.C. 1300 to 1050.
The most celebrated of these kings was Theseus, to whom is
ascribed the awotKiafj.o'i, whereby Athens became the capital
of a centralized monarchy, instead of one out of many nearly
equal country towns. Another king, Menestheus, was said to
have fought at Troy. Codrus, the last of the monarchs, fell,
according to the tradition, in resisting a Dorian invasion, made
from the recently conquered Peloponnese.

The Kingly Period was followed at Athens by the gradual
development of an aristocracy. The Eupatrids had acquired
power enough under the kings to abolish monarchy at the
death of Codrus, and to substitute for it the life-archonship,
which, though confined to the descendants of Codrus, was not
a royal dignity, but a mere chief magistracy. The Eupatrids
elected from among the qualified persons ; and the archon was,
at least in theory, responsible. Thirteen such archons held
office before any further change was made, their united reigns
covering a space of about three centuries, B.C. 1050 to 752.

On the death of Alcmason, the last archon for life, the Eu-
patrids made a further change. Archons were to be elected
for ten years only, so that responsibility could be enforced.

ANCIENT HISTORY lai

ex-archons being liable to prosecution and punishment. The
descendants of Codrus were at first preserved in their old
dignity ; but the fourth decennial archon, Hipporaanes, being
deposed for his cruelty, the right of the Medontidae was de-
clared to be forfeited (B.C. 714), and the office was thrown open
to all Eupatrids.

Finally, after seven decennial archons had held office, the
supreme power was put in commission (B.C. 684). In lieu
of a single chief magistrate, a board 0/ nine archons, annually
elected, was set up, the original kingly functions being divided
among them. The aristocracy was now fully installed in power,
office being confined to Eupatrids, and every office being open
to all such persons, Eupatrids alone having the suffrage, and
the Agora itself, or general assembly of the people, having
ceased to meet, or become purely formal and passive.

The full triumph of the oligarchy did not very long precede
the first stir of democratic life. Within sixty years of the time
of complete aristocratical ascendency, popular discontent be-
gan to manifest itself, and a demand for written laws arose,
often the earliest cry of an oppressed people. Alarmed, but not
intimidated, the nobles endeavored to crush the rising demo-
cratic spirit by an unsparing severity ; their answer to the de-
mands made on them was the legislation of Draco (B.C.
624), which, by making death the penalty for almost all crimes,
placed the very lives of the citizens at the disposal of the ruling
order. The increased dissatisfaction which this legislation
caused probably encouraged Cylon to make his rash attempt
(B.C. 612), which was easily put down by the oligarchs; who,
however, contrived to lose ground by their victory, incurring,
as they did in the course of it, the g^ilt of sacrilege, and at
the same time exasperating the people, who had hoped much
from Cylon 's effort. Under these circumstances, after a vain
attempt had been made to quiet matters by the purification of
Epimenides (B.C. 595), and after the political discontent had
taken the new and dangerous shape involved in the formation
of local factions (Pediaei, Parali, and Diacrii), Solon, an Eupat-
rid, but of so poor a family that he had himself been engaged
in trade, was by common consent intrusted with the task of
framing a new constitution, B.C. 594.

12a RAWLINSON

The legislation of Solon, wise as it seems to moderns, was
far from satisfying his contemporaries. Like most moderate
politicians, he was accused by one party of having gone too
far, by another of not having done enough. His personal in-
fluence sufficed for a time to restrain the discontented; but
when this influence was withdrawn (about B.C. 570), violent
contentions broke out. The local factions revived. A strug-
gle commenced between a reactionary party under Lycurgus,
a conservative party under the Alcmaeonid Megacles, and a
party of progress under Pisistratus, which terminated in the
triumph of the last-named leader, who artfully turned his suc-
cess to his own personal advantage by assuming the position
of Dictator, or (as the Greeks called it) Tyrant, B.C. 560.

The expulsion of the tyrant was followed by fresh troubles.
A contest for power arose between Isagoras, the friend of Cle-
omenes, and Clisthenes, the head of the Alcmaeonid family,
which terminated in favor of the latter, despite the armed inter-
ference of Sparta. Clisthenes, however, had to purchase his
victory by an alliance with the democratical party; and the
natural result of his success was a further change in the con-
stitution, which was modified in a democratic sense.

The establishment of democracy gave an impulse to the
spirit of patriotism, which resulted almost immediately in some
splendid military successes. Athens had for some time been
growing in warlike power. Under Solon she had taken Sala-
mis from Megara, and played an important part in the first
Sacred War (B.C. 600 to 591). About B.C. 518, or a little
earlier, she had accepted the protectorate of the Plataeans.
Now (B.C. 507) being attacked at one and the same time by
Sparta, by Boeotia, and by the Chalcideans of Euboea, she com-
pletely triumphed over the coalition. The Spartan kings quar-
relled, and the force under their command withdrew without
risking a battle. The Boeotians and Chalcideans were signally
defeated. Chalcis itself was conquered and occupied. A naval
struggle with ^gina, the ally of Bceotia, followed, during the
continuance of which the first hostilities took place between
Athens and Persia. Proud of her recent victories, and con-
fident in her strength, Athens complied with the request of
Aristagoras, and sent twenty ships to support the revolt which

ANCIENT HISTORY

123

threatened to deprive the Great King of the whole sea-board
of Asia Minor. Though the burning of Sardis was followed
by the defeat of Ephesus, yet the Persian monarch deemed his
honor involved in the further chastisement on her own soil of
the audacious power which had presumed to invade his do-
minions. An attempt to conquer Greece would, no doubt, have
been made even without provocation ; but the part taken by
Athens in the Ionic revolt precipitated the struggle. It was
well that the contest came when it did. Had it been delayed
until Athens had g^own into a rival to Sparta, the result might
have been different. Greece might then have succumbed ; and
European freedom and civilization, trampled under foot by the
hordes of Asia, might have been unable to recover itself.

Part II.
History of the other Grecian States.

The history of the smaller states will be most conveniently
given under the five heads of the Peloponnesian States; the
States of Central Greece; those of Northern Greece; those
situated in the islands ; and those which either were, or were
regarded as, coloniea

Smaller Peloponnesian States.

Achsea. — ^Th'e traditions said that when the Dorians con-
quered Sparta, the Spartan king Tisamenus, son of Orestes, led
the Achaeans northward, and, expelling the lonians from the
tract which lay along the Corinthian Gulf, set up an Achaean
kingdom in those parts, which lasted for several generations.
Og^gus, however, the latest of these monarchs, having left be-
hind him sons of a tyrannical temper, the Achaeans destroyed
the monarchy, and set up a federal republic. Twelve cities
composed the league, which were originally Pellene, ^geira
(or Hyparesia), ^^gae, Bura. Helice, ^Egium, Rhypes, Patrae,
Pharae, Olenus, Dyme, and Tritaea, all situated on or near the
coast except the last two, which were in the interior. The
common place of meeting for the league was Helice, where an

124 RAWLINSON

annual festival was held, and common sacrifices were offered
to Heliconian Neptune. The constitution of the several cities
is said to have been democratic. The league was, no doubt,
political as well as religious ; but no details are known of it.
According to Polybius it was admired for its fairness and equal-
ity, and was taken as a model by the cities of Magna Graecia in
the early part of the fifth century. We may gather from Thucyd-
ides that it was of the loose type so common in Greece. The
Achaeans seem to have manifested in the early times a dispo-
sition to stay at home and to keep aloof from the quarrels of
their neighbors. Hence the history of the country scarcely
begins till the time of Antigonus, from which period the league
formed a nucleus round which independent Greece rallied itself.
Arcadia. — The Arcadians were regarded as aboriginal in-
habitants of their country. They called themselves 'jrpoaektjvoL.
The Dorian conquests in the Peloponnese left them untouched ;
and they retained to a late date, in their remote valleys and cold
high mountain pastures, very primitive habits. The tradition
makes the entire country form, in the old times, a single mon-
archy, which continues till B.C. 668; but it may be doubted
whether there had really ever existed in Arcadia any thing
more than an Amphictyonic union prior to Epaminondas.
The whole country is physically broken up into separate val-
leys and basins, whose inhabitants would naturally form sep-
arate and distinct communities, while retaining a certain sense
of ethnic relationship. The most important of these communi-
ties were Mantinea and Tegea, neighboring towns, between
which there were frequent wars. Next to these may be placed
Orchomenus, Pheneus, and Stymphalus towards the north-
east ; Cleitor and Heraea towards the west ; and Phigaleia, on
the north-western border, near Messenia. The Arcadians,
however, loved villages rather than towns ; and the numerous
population was chiefly located in small hamlets scattered about
the mountains. Arcadia was subject to constant aggressions
at the hands of Sparta, which she sought to revenge upon fit-
ting occasions. These aggressions began in the times previous
to Lycurgus (see p. 117), and continued afterwards almost con-
stantly. In retaliation, the Arcadians assisted Messenia
throughout both the Messenian wars. Tegea, as the nearest

ANCIENT HISTORY 125

State to Sparta, suffered most at her hands ; and after a long
struggle, it would seem that Arcadia generally (about B.C.
560) acknowledged the Lacedaemonian hegemony, placing her
full military strength at the disposal of Sparta in her wars, but
retaining her internal independence. Mantinea even, upon oc-
casions, thwarted the policy of Sparta.

Corinth. — Corinth, a rich and famous city even in the times
anterior to the Doric conquests, was occupied by Dorian set-
tlers from Argos soon after the reduction of that state. A mon-
archy was established under kings who claimed descent from
Hercules, twelve such rulers holding the throne during the
space of 327 years. At the end of this time monarchy was ex-
changed for oligarchy, power remaining (as at Athens) in the
hands of a branch of the royal family, the Bacchiadae, who in-
termarried only among themselves, and elected each year from
their own body a Prytanis, or chief magistrate. This state of
things continued for ninety years, when a revolution was ef-
fected by Cypselus, who, having ingratiated himself with the
people, rose up against the oligarchs, expelled them, and made
himself tyrant. Cypselus reigned from B.C. 657 to 627, when
he was succeeded by his son, Periander, who reigned from B.C.
627 to 587. A third monarch of the dynasty, Psammetichus,
the nephew or grandson of Periander, mounted the throne, but
was expelled, after a reig^ of three years, by the people, per-
haps assisted by Sparta, B.C. 584. The time of the Cypselids
was one of great material wealth and prosperity; literature
and the arts flourished ; commerce was encouraged ; colonies
were sent out ; and the hegemony of the mother country over
her colonies successfully asserted. (The chief Corinthian
settlements were Corcyra, Ambracia, Leucas, Anactorium,
Epidamnus, ApoUonia, Syracuse, and Potidaea. Of these, Am-
bracia, Leucas, Anactorium, Epidamnus, Apollonia, and Poti-
dasa were content to be subject. Corcyra generally asserted
independence, but was forced to submit to the Cypselids. Syr-
acuse must have been from the first practically independent.)
After the downfall of the tyrants, who are said to have ruled
harshly, a republic was established on a tolerably wide basis.
Power was placed in the hands of the wealthy class ; and even
commerce and trade were no bars to the holding of office.

126 RAWLINSON

Corinth became one of the richest of the Greek states ; but, as
she increased in wealth, she sank in political importance. Re-
gard for her material interests induced her to accept the pro-
tection of Sparta, and from about B.C. 550 she became merely
the second power in the Spartan league, a position which she
occupied with slight interruptions till B.C. 394.

Elis. — The settlement of the ^tolo-Dorians under Oxylus
(see p. 113) had been made in the more northern portion of the
country, between the Larisus and the Ladon or Selleis. The
region south of this as far as the Neda remained in the posses-
sion of the old inhabitants, and was divided into two districts,
Pisatis, or the tract between the Ladon and the Alpheus, of
which Pisa was the capital, and Triphylia, the tract between the
Alpheus and the Neda, of which the chief city was Lepreum.
The Eleans, however, claimed a hegemony over the whole
country ; and this claim gave rise to frequent wars, in which
the Eleans had the advantage, though they never succeeded
in completely absorbing even Pisatis. The chief importance
of Elis was derived from the celebration within her territory
of the Olympic Games, a festival originally Pisan, of which the
direction was assumed by the Eleans, but constantly disputed
by the Pisatans. Sparta in the early times supported the Elean
claims ; but in and after the Peloponnesian struggle it became
her policy to uphold the independence of Lepreum. The Eleans
dwelt chiefly in villages till after the close of the great Persian
War, when the city of Elis was first founded, B.C. 477.

Sicyon. — Sicyon was believed to have been one of the oldest
cities in Greece, and to have had kings of its own at a very
remote period. Homer, however, represents it as forming, at
the time of the Trojan War, part of the dominions of Agamem-
non. Nothing can be said to be really known of Sicyon until
the time of the Doric immigration into the Peloponnese, when
it was occupied by a body of Dorians from Argos, at whose
head was Phalces, son of Temenus. A Heracleid monarchy
was established in the line of this prince's descendants, which
was superseded after some centuries by an oligarchy. Power
during this period was wholly confined to the Dorians ; the
native non-Doric element in the population, which was numer-
ous, being destitute of political privilege. But towards the

ANCIENT HISTORY 127

beginning of the seventh century B.C. a change occurred.
Orthagoras, a non-Dorian, said to have been by profession a
cook, subverted the oHgarchy, estabHshed himself upon the
throne, and quietly transferred the predominance in the state
from the Dorian to the non-Dorian population. He left his
throne to his posterity, who ruled for above a hundred years.
Clisthenes, the last monarch of the line, adding insult to injury,
changed the names of the Dorian tribes in Sicyon from Hyllaei,
Dymanes, and Pamphyli, to Hyatae, Oneatae, and Chaereatae, or
" Pig-folk," " Ass-folk," and " Swine-folk." He reigned from
about B.C. 595 to 560. About sixty years after his death, the
Dorians in Sicyon seem to have recovered their preponderance,
and the state became one of the most submissive members of
the Lacedaemonian confederacy.

Smaller States of Central Greece.

Megaris. — Megaris was occupied by Dorians from Corinth,
shortly after the great immigration into the Peloponnese. At
first the colony seems to have been subject to the mother coun-
try ; but this subjection was soon thrown off, and we find Cor-
inth fomenting quarrels among the various Megarian towns —
Megara, Heraea, Peiraea, Tripodiscus, and Cynosura — in the
hope of recovering her influence. About B.C. 726 the Corin-
thians seem to have made an attempt at conquest, which was
repulsed by Orsippus, the Olympian runner. Nearly at the
same time commenced the series of Megarian colonies, which
form so remarkable a feature in the history of this state. The
first of these was Megara Hyblaea, near Syracuse, founded
(according to Thucydides) in B.C. 728, from which was sent
out a sub-colony to Selinus ; then followed Chalcedon, in B.C.
674; Byzantium, in B.C. 657; Selymbria, in B.C. 662; Herac-
lea Pontica, in B.C. 559; and Chersonesus, near the modern
Sebastopol, not long afterwards. The naval power of Megara
must have been considerable ; and it is not surprising to find
that about this time (B.C. 600) she disputed with Athens the
possession of Salamis. Her despot, Theagenes, was an enter-
prising and energetic monarch. Rising to power as the repre-
sentative of the popular cause (about B.C. 630), he supported

128 RAWLINSON

his son-in-law, Cylon, in his attempt to occupy a similar
position at Athens. He adorned Megara with splendid build-
ings. He probably seized Salamis, and gained the victories
which induced the Athenians for a time to put up with their
loss. On his deposition by the oligarchs (about B.C. 600),
the war was renewed — Nisaea was taken by Pisistratus, and
Salamis recovered by Cylon. The oligarchs ruled without
bloodshed, but still oppressively; so that shortly afterwards
there was a second democratic revolution. Debts were now
abolished, and even the return of the interest paid on them
exacted (TraXtvTo/cMi). The rich were forced to entertain the
poor in their houses. Temples and pilgrims are said to have
been plundered. Vast numbers of the nobles were banished.
At length the exiles were so numerous that they formed an
army, invaded the country, and, reinstating themselves by
force, established a somewhat narrow oligarchy, which ruled
at least till B.C. 460.

Bceotia. — When the Boeotians, expelled from Arne by the
Thessalians, settled in the country to which they henceforth
gave name, expelling from it in their turn the Cadmaeans,
Minyae, etc., they seem to have divided themselves into as
many states as there were cities. What the form of govern-
ment in the several states was at first is uncertain ; we can only
say that there is no trace of monarchy, and that as soon as we
obtain a glimpse of the internal affairs of any of them, they are
oligarchical republics. The number of the states seems to have
been originally fourteen, but by the time of the Peloponnesian
War it had dwindled to ten, partly by a process of absorption,
partly by separation. Oropus, Eleutherae, and Plataea had been
lost to Athens; Chgeroneia had been incorporated with Or-
chomenus ; the remaining ten states were Thebes, Orchomenus,
Thespiae, Lebadeia, Coroneia, Copse, Haliartus, Tanagra, An-
thedon, and perhaps Chalia. Between these states there had
existed, probably from the first, an Amphictyony, or religious
union, which had the temple of Itonian Athene near Coroneia
for its centre ; and there took place once a year the celebration
of the Pamboeotia, or general festival of the Boeotians. By
degrees, out of this religious association there grew up a fed-
eral union; the states recognized themselves as constituting

ANCIENT HISTORY 129

a single political unit, and arranged among themselves a real
federal government. The supreme authority was placed in the
hands of a council (/SouXj;), which had a curious fourfold divi-
sion ; while the executive functions were exercised by eleven
Boeotarchs (two from Thebes, one from each of the other cities),
who were at once the generals of the league and its presiding
magistrates. Though the place of meeting- for the council
seems to have been Coroneia, yet Thebes by her superior size
and power obtained an undue predominance in the confedera-
tion, and used it in such a way as to excite the jealousy and
disaffection of almost all the other cities. As early as B.C. 510,
Plataea was driven to detach herself from the confederation,
and to put herself under the protection of Athens. In later
times Thespiae made more than one attempt to follow the Pla-
taean example, B.C. 423 and 414. The readiness of Athens to
receive and protect revolted members of the league was among
the causes of that hostility which Boeotia was always ready
to display towards her ; and the general tendency of members
of the league to revolt was among the chief causes of that po-
litical weakness which Boeotia exhibits, as compared with
Athens and Sparta.

Phocis. — There can be no doubt that Phocis was, like Boeo-
tia, a confederation ; but from the comparative insignificance
of the state no details of the constitution have come down to
us. The place of meeting for the deputies seems to have been
an isolated building (to ^odklkov) on the route from Daulis to
Delphi. No Phocian city had any such preponderance as be-
longed to Thebes among the cities of Boeotia, and hence the
league appears to have been free from those perpetual jeal-
ousies and heartburnings which we remark in the neighboring
countrv'. Still certain secessions from the confederacy appear
to have taken place, as that of Delphi, and, again, that of
Cirrha, which was a separate state about B.C. 600. A constant
enmity existed between Phocis and Thessaly, consequent upon
the attempts made by the Thessalians from time to time to
conquer the country. These attempts were successfully re-
sisted ; but they were so far injurious to the independence of
Phocis, that they produced a tendency to lean on Boeotia and
to look to her for aid. Still, the military history of Phocis
9

13© RAWLINSON

down to the close of the Persian War is creditable to the nation,
which frequently repulsed the invasions of the Thessalians, and
which offered a brave resistance to the enormous host of
Xerxes.

Locris. — There were three countries of this name; and
though a certain ethnic connection between them may be as-
sumed from the common appellation, yet politically the three
countries appear to have been entirely separate and distinct.
The Locri Ozolae (the " stinking Locri ") possessed the largest
and most important tract, that lying between Parnassus and
the Corinthian Gulf, bounded on the west by .(Etolia. They
probably formed a confederacy under the presidency of Am-
phissa. The Locri Epicnemidii, or Locrians of Mount Cnemis,
and the Locri Opuntii, or those of Opus, were separated from
their western brethren by the whole breadth of the territory
of Phocis. They were also separated from each other, but only
a narrow strip or tongue of Phocian territory, which ran down
to the Euripus at the town of Daphnus. Of the internal or-
ganization of the Epicnemidii we know nothing. The Opun-
tians were probably a confederacy under the hegemony of
Opus.

yEtolia. — ^^tolia, the country of Diomed, though famous in
the early times, fell back during the migratory period almost
into a savage condition, probably through the influx into it of
an Illyrian population which became only partially Hellenized.
The nation was divided into numerous tribes, among which
the most important were the Apodoti, the Ophioneis, the Eu-
rytanes, and the Agraeans. There were scarcely any cities,
village life being preferred- universally. No traces appear of
a confederation of the tribes until the time of Alexander, though
in times of danger they could unite for purposes of defense
against the common enemy. The Agraeans, so late as the Pelo-
ponnesian War, were under the government of a king: the
political condition of the other tribes is unknown. It was not
till the wars which arose among Alexander's successors that
the i^tolians formed a real political union, and became an im-
portant power in Greece.

Acarnania. — The Acarnanians were among the more back-
ward of the Greek nations in the historical times, but they

ANCIENT HISTORY 131

were considerably more advanced than the iEtolians. They
possessed a number of cities, among which the most important
were Stratus, Amphilochian Argos, and CEniadae. From a very
remote date they had formed themselves into a federation,
which not only held the usual assemblies for federal purposes
(probably at Stratus), but had also a common Court of Justice
{SiKotrrqpiop) for the decision of causes, at Olpae. There was
great jealousy between the native Acarnanians and the colonies
planted by the Corinthians on or near their coasts, Ambracia,
Leucas, Anactorium, Sollium, and Astacus, which in the early
times certainly did not belong to the league. The league itself
was of the lax character usual in Greece, and allowed of the
several cities forming their own alliances, and even taking op-
posite sides in a war.

States of Nortfum Greece.

Thessaly. — The Thesprotian conquerors of Thessaly estab-
lished a condition of things in that country not very unlike that
which the Dorians introduced into Laconia. The conquerors
themselves formed a noble class which claimed the ownership
of most of the territory and confined to itself the possession
of political power. The conquered were reduced to two very
different positions : some retained their personal freedom and
the right to their lands, but were made subject to tribute;
others (the Penestae) were reduced to the condition of serfs,
cultivating the lands of their masters, but were protected in
their holdings, could not be sold out of the country, and both
might and did often acquire considerable property. The chief
diflferences between the two countries were (i) that in Thessaly
the intermediate class, Achaeans, Magnetes, Perrhaebi, etc.,
instead of being scattered over the country and intermixed
with the nobles and serfs, were the sole occupants of certain dis-
tricts, retained their old ethnic name, their Amphictyonic vote,
and their governmental organization ; and (2) that the con-
querors, instead of concentrating themselves in one city, took
possession of several, establishing in each a distinct and sep-
arate government. The governments seem to have been orig-

132

RAWLINSON

inally monarchies, which merged in aristocracies, wherein one
family held a quasi-royal position. The Aleuadae at Larissa
and Pharsalus (?) and the Scopadae at Cranon correspond
closely to the Medontidae at Athens. A federal tie of the
weakest character united the several states of Thessaly in
ordinary times; but upon occasions this extreme laxity was
replaced by a most stringent centralization. A Tagus (Com-
mander-in-Chief) of all Thessaly was appointed, who exer-
cised powers little short of despotic over the whole country.
Such, apparently, was the power wielded (about B.C. 510) by
Cineas, and such beyond all question was the dominion of Ja-
son of Pherae, and his three brothers, Polydorus, Polyphron,
and Alexander, B.C. 380 to 356. In the remoter times Thess-
aly was aggressive and menaced the independence of the states
of Central Greece ; but from the dawn of exact history to the
time of Jason her general policy was peaceful, and, except as
an occasional ally of Athens, she is not found to have taken any
part in the internal quarrels of the Greeks. Her aristocracies
were selfish, luxurious, and devoid of patriotic feeling: con-
tent with their position at home, they did not desire the glory
of foreign conquest. Thus Thessaly plays a part in the history
of Greece very disproportioned to her power and resources,
not rising into any importance till very shortly before the Mace-
donian period.

Epirus. — Anterior to the Persian wars, and indeed until the
time of Philip of Macedon, Epirus was a mere geographical
expression, designating no ethnic nor political unity. The
tract so called was parcelled out among a number of states,
some of which were Greek, others barbarian. Of these the
chief were : (i) the semi-barbarous kingdom of the Molossians,
ruled over a family which claimed descent from Achilles — a
constitutional monarchy, where the king and people alike
swore to observe the laws; (2) the kingdom of the Orestae,
barbarian; (3) the kingdom of the Parauaei, likewise barba-
rian ; (4) the republic of the Chaonians, barbarian, administered
by two annual magistrates chosen out of a singk ruling family ;
(5) the republic of the Thesprotians, barbarian ; and (6) the
Ambracian republic, Greek, a colony and dependency of Cor-
inth. By alliance with Philip of Macedon, the Molossian kings

ANCIENT HISTORY 133

were enabled to bring the Epirotic states under their dominion,
about B.C. 350. After their fall, B.C. 239, Epirus became a
federal republic.

Greek Insular States.

Corey ra — Corcyra, the most western of the Greek islands,
was colonized from Corinth about B.C. 730. — From the fer-
tility of the island, and the advantages of its situation, the set-
tlement soon became important : a jealousy sprang up between
it and the mother country, which led to hostilities as early as
B.C. 670. During the rule of the Cypselid princes at Corinth,
Corcyra was forced to submit to them; but soon after their
fall independence was recovered. From this time till the com-
mencement of the Peloponnesian War, the commerce and
naval power of Corcyra went on increasing; so early as the
time of the invasion of Xerxes (B.C. 480) their navy was the
second in Greece, and just before the Peloponnesian War it
amounted to 120 triremes. The government was a republic,
which fluctuated between aristocracy and democracy; party
spirit ran high ; and both sides were guilty of grievous ex-
cesses.

Cephallenia. — This island, though considerably larger than
Corcyra, and exceedingly fertile, was politically insignificant.
It contained four cities, each of which was a distinct state, Pale,
Cranii, Same, and Pronus or Pronesus. Probably the four
were united in a sort of loose confederation. Pale seems to
have been the most important of the cities.

Zacynthus, which was originally peopled by Achaeans from
the Peloponnese, formed an independent state till the time of
the Athenian confederacy. It had a single city, of the same
name with the island itself, and is chiefly noted in the early
ages as furnishing an asylum to fugitives from Sparta.

i^g^na is said to have been occupied by Dorian colonists
from Epidaurus shortly after the invasion of the Peloponnese.
It was at first completely dependent on the mother country;
but, growing in naval power, it in a little time shook off the
yoke, and became one of the most flourishing of the Grecian
communities. The iEginetans early provoked the jealousy of

134

RAWLINSON

Samos, and a war followed between the two powers, which had
no very important consequences. About B.C. 500, ^gina
found a more dangerous rival in her near neighbor, Athens,
whose growing greatness she endeavored to check, in combi-
nation with Boeotia. A naval war, which lasted about twenty
years, was terminated, B.C. 481, by the common danger which
threatened all Greece from the armament collected by Xerxes.
JEgina played an important part in the Persian struggle ; but
still it was one of the effects of the war to exalt her rival,
Athens, to a very decided pre-eminence above all the other
naval powers of Greece. Not content, however, with mere pre-
ponderance. Athens, on breaking with Sparta, B.C. 461, pro-
ceeded to crush ^gina, which resisted for four years, but in
B.C. 457 became an Athenian dependency.

Euboea. — This large island contained a number of separate
and independent states, whereof the two most important were
Eretria and Chalcis. These cities rose to eminence at an early
period, and contended together in a great war, wherein most
of the Greeks of Europe, and even some from Asia, took part.
The balance of advantage seems to have rested with Chalcis,
which in the later times always appears as the chief city of the
island. Chalcis sent out numerous and important colonies,
as Cuma and Rhegium in Italy ; Naxos, Leontini, Catana, and
Zancle in Sicily ; Olynthus, Torone, and many other places on
the coast of Thrace. Its constitution was oligarchical, the chief
power being lodged in the hands of the " Horse-keepers "
(iTTTTo/SoTat), or Knights. About B.C. 500, Chalcis was in-
duced to join the Spartans and Boeotians in an attempt to crush
Athens, which failed, and cost Chalcis its independence. The
lands of the Hippobotse were confiscated, and an Athenian col-
ony established in the place. Chalcis, together with the rest
of Eubcea, revolted from Athens in B.C. 445, but was again
reduced by Pericles. In the Peloponnesian War, B.C. 411,
better success attended a second effort.

The Cyclades. — These islands are said to have been origi-
nally peopled by Carians from Asia Minor ; but about the time
of the great migrations (B.C. 1200 to 1000) they were occupied
by the Greeks, the more northern by Ionian, the more southern
by Dorian adventurers. After a while an Ionian Amphictyony

ANCIENT HISTORY 135

grew up in the northern group, having the islet of Delos for
its centre, and the Temple of Apollo there for its place of meet-
ing ; whence the position occupied by Delos on the formation
of the Athenian confederacy. The largest, and, politically
speaking, most important of the Cyclades were Andros and
Naxos ; the former of which founded the colonies of Acanthus,
Sane, Argilus, and Stageirus in Thrace, while the latter re-
pulsed a Persian attack in B.C. 501, and contended against the
whole force of Athens in B.C. 466. Paros, famous for its
marble, may be placed next to Andros and Naxos. It was the
mother city of Thasos, and of Pharos in Illyria. Little is
known of the constitutional history of any of the Cyclades.
Naxos, however, seems to have gone through the usual course
of Greek revolutionary change, being governed by an oligarchy
until the time of Lygdamis (B.C. 540 to 530), who, professing
to espouse the popular cause, made himself king. His tyranny
did not last long, and an oligarchy was once more established,
which in its turn gave way to a democracy before B.C. 501.

Lemnos. — This island, which had a Thracian population in
the earliest times and then a Pelasgic one, was first Hellenized
after its conquest, about B.C. 500, by the great Miltiades. It
was from this time regarded as an Athenian possession, and
seems to have received a strong body of colonists from Athens.
Lenmos contained two towns, Hephaestia and Myrina, which
formed separate states at the time of the Athenian conquest.
Hephaestia was at that time under a king.

Thasos, which was peculiarly rich in minerals, was early
colonized by the Phoenicians, who worked the mines very suc-
cessfully, lonians from Paros Hellenized it about B.C. 720 to
700, and soon raised it into a powerful state. Settlements were
made by the Thasians upon the main-land opposite their north-
em shores, whereof the most important were Scapte-Hyle and
Datum. The gold-mines in this quarter were largely worked,
and in B.C. 492 the Thasians had an annual revenue of from
200 to 300 talents (£48,000 to £72,000). In B.C. 494, Histiaeus
of Miletus attempted to reduce the island, but failed; it was,
however, in the following year forced to submit to the Persians.
On the defeat of Xerxes, Thasos became a member of the
Athenian confederacy, but revolting, B.C. 465, was attacked

136 RAWLINSON

and forced to submit, B.C. 463. In the Peloponnesian War an-
other revolt (B.C. 411) was again followed by submission, B.C.
408, and Thasos thenceforth continued, except for short inter-
vals, subject to Athens.

Crete. — The population of Crete in the early times was of a
very mixed character. Homer enumerates among its in-
habitants Achaeans, Eteocretes, Cydonians, Dorians, and
Pelasgi. Of these the Eteocretes and Cydonians were even
farther removed than the Pelasgi from the Hellenic type. In
the early days the Cretans were famous pirates, whence prob-
ably the traditions of Minos and his naval power. Whether
the Dorian population was really settled in the island from a
remote antiquity, or reached Crete from the Peloponnese after
the Dorian conquest of the Achaean kingdoms, is a disputed
point ; but the latter view is, on the whole, the more probable.
In the historical times the Dorian element had a decided pre-
ponderance over all the rest, and institutions prevailed in all
the chief cities which had a strong resemblance to those of
Sparta. The Spartan division of the freemen into citizens and
pcricrci existed only in Crete; and, though the latter country
had no Helots, their place was supplied by slaves, public and
private, who cultivated the lands for their masters. Among
these last a system of syssitia, closely resembling the Spartan,
was established ; and a military training similar in character,
though less severe. The island was parcelled out among a
number of separate states, often at war with one another, but
wise enough to unite generally against a common enemy. Of
these states the most powerful were Gnossus and Gortyna, each
of which aspired to exercise a hegemony over the whole island.
Next in importance was Cydonia, and in later times Lyctus,
or Lyttus. Originally the cities were ruled by hereditary
kings ; but ere long their places were taken by elected Cosmi,
ten in each community, who held office for a certain period,
probably a year, and were chosen from certain families. Side
by side with this executive board, there existed in each com-
munity a senate (yepovaia), composed of all who had served the
office of Cosmos with credit, and constituting really the chief
power in the state. There was, further, an assembly (cKKXTjaia)
comprising all the citizens, which accepted or rejected the

ANCIENT HISTORY 137

measures submitted to it, but had no initiative, and no power of
debate or amendment. Crete took no part in the general af-
fairs of Greece till after the time of Alexander. It maintained
a policy of abstinence during both the Persian and Pelopon-
nesian Wars. The military character of the Cretans was, how-
ever, maintained, both by the frequent quarrels of the states
one with another, and by the common practice of taking ser-
vice as mercenaries.

Cyprus. — This island seems to have been originally occu-
pied by the Kittim, a Japhetic race, who left their name in the
old capital, Citium (Kirtov). Soon after the first development
of Phoenician power, however, it passed into the possession of
that people, who long continued the predominant race in the
island. When Hellenic colonists first began to flow into it is
doubtful ; but there is evidence that by the time of Sargon
(B.C. 720 to 700) a large portion of the island was Greek, and
under Esarhaddon all the cities, except Paphos, Tamisus, and
Aphrodisias, appeared to have been ruled by Greek king^.
Cyprus seems scarcely ever for any length of time to have been
mdependent. It was held by the Phoenicians from about B.C.
1 100 to 725, by the Assyrians from about B.C. 700 to 650, by
the Egyptians from about B.C. 550 to 525, and by the Persians
from B.C. 525 to 333. The most important of the cities,
which, by whomsoever founded, eventually became Greek,
were Salamis and Ammochosta (now Famagusta) on the east-
em coast ; Citium, Curium, and Paphos on the southern ; Soli
and Lapethus on the northern ; and Limenia, Tamasus, and
Idalium in the interior. Amathus continued always Phoeni-
cian. The most flourishing of the Greek states was Salamis ;
and the later history of the island is closely connected with
that of the Salaminian kings. Among these were: i. Evel-
thon, contemporary with Arcesilaus III. of Cyrene, about B.C.
530 ; 2. Gorgus ; and 3. Onesilus, contemporary with Darius
Hystaspis, B.C. 520 to 500. The latter joined in the Ionian re-
volt, but was defeated and slain. 4. Evagoras I., contem-
porary with Artaxerxes Longimanus, B.C. 449. 5. Evagoras
II., contemporary with Artaxerxes Mnemon, B.C. 391 to 370.
This prince rebelled, and, assisted by the Athenians and Eg>'p-
tians, carried on a long war against the Persians, but, after the

138 RAWLINSON

Peace of Antalcidas, was forced to submit, B.C. 380, retaining,
however, his sovereignty. 6. Protagoras, brother of Evago-
ras II., contemporary with Artaxerxes Ochus, B.C. 350. He
banished Evagoras, son of Evagoras II., and joined the great
revolt which followed Ochus's first and unsuccessful expedi-
tion against Egypt. This revolt was put down before B.C.
346, by the aid of mercenaries commanded by Phocion ; and
thenceforth Cyprus continued faithful to Persia, till Alexan-
der's victory at Issus, when the nine kings of the island volun-
tarily transferred their allegiance to Macedon, B.C. 333.

Greek Colonies,

The number of the Greek colonies, and their wide diffusion,
are very remarkable. From the extreme recess of the Sea of
Azov to the mouth of the Mediterranean, almost the entire
coast, both of continents and islands, was studded with the
settlements of this active and energetic people. Most thickly
were these sown towards the north and the north-east, more
sparingly towards the south and west, where a rival civilization
— the Phoenician — cramped, though it could not crush, Gre-
cian enterprise. Carthage and Tyre would fain have kept ex-
clusively in their own hands these regions ; but the Greeks
forced themselves in here and there, as in Egypt and in the
Cyrena'ica ; while of their own northern shore, except in Spain,
they held exclusive possession, meeting their rivals in the isl-
ands of Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, and Cyprus.

The main causes of the spread of the Greeks from their
proper home in the Hellenic peninsula, over so many and such
distant regions, were two in number. The race was prolific,
and often found itself cramped for room, either from the mere
natural increase of population, or from the pressure upon it
of larger and more powerful nations. Hence arose move-
ments which were, properly speaking, migrations, though the
term "colonization" has been improperly applied to them. To
this class belong the ^olian, Ionian, and Dorian settlements
in Asia, and the Achaean in Italy. But the more usual cause of
movement was commercial or political enterprise, the state
which founded a settlement being desirous of extending its in-

ANCIENT HISTORY 139

fluence or its trade into a new region. Such settlements were
colonies proper; and between these and the mother country
there was always, at any rate at first, a certain connection,
which was absent in the case of settlements arising out of mi-
grations. Occasionally individual caprice or political disturb-
ance led to the foundation of a new city ; but such cases were
comparatively rare, and require only a passing mention.

The colonies proper of the Greeks were of two kinds,
airoiKuu and kX-qpoxj^iat. In the former, the political connec-
tion between the mother country and the colony was slight
and weak; in the latter, it was exceedingly close and strong.
'AiroiKiai were, in fact, independent communities, attached to
the mother country merely by affection and by certain gener-
ally prevalent usages, which, however, were neither altogether
obligatory nor very definite. The colony usually worshipped
as a hero its original founder (ot/cMm79), and honored the same
gods as the parent city. It bore part in the great festivals of
its metropolis, and contributed offerings to them. It distin-
guished by special honors at its own games and festivals the
citizens of the parent community. It used the same emblems
upon its coins. Its chief-priests were, in some instances,
drawn continually from the mother state; and, if it designed
to found a new settlement itself, it sought a leader from the
same quarter. War between a parent city and a colony was
regarded as impious, and a certain obligation lay on each to
assist the other in times of danger. But the observance of
these various usages was altogether voluntary ; no attempt was
ever made to enforce them, the complete political indepen-
dence of the aTToiKia being always understood and acknowl-
edged. In the KXrjpovx^a the case was wholly different. There
the state sent out a body of its citizens to form a new com-
munity in territory which it regarded as its own ; the settlers
retained all their rights as citizens of their old country, and in
their new one were mainly a garrison intended to maintain the
authority of those who sent them out. The dependence of
K\r)povx^t on the parent state was thus entire and absolute.
The cleruchs were mainly citizens of their old state, to whom
certain special duties had been assigned and certain benefits
granted.

T40 RAWLINSON

The Greek settlements of whatsoever kind may be divided
geographically into the Eastern, the Western, and the South-
ern, Under the first head w^ill come those of the eastern and
northern shores of the Mgea.n, those of the Propontis, of the
Black Sea, and of the Sea of Azov ; under the second, those of
Italy, Sicily, Gaul, Spain, and the adjacent islands ; under the
third, those of Africa.

THIRD PERIOD.

From the Commencement of the Wars with Persia, B.C. 500,
to the Battle of Chceroneia, B.C. 338.*

The tendency of the Greek States, in spite of their separatist
leanings, towards consolidation and union round one or more
centres, has been already noticed. Up to the date of the Per-

* Sources. For the first portion of this period, from B.C. 500 to 479,
Herodotus (books v. to ix.) is our chief authority; but he may be
supplemented to a considerable extent from Plutarch (" Vit. Themist.
and Aristid.") and Nepos (" Vit. Miltiad., Themist., Aristid., and
Pausan."). For the second portion of the period, from B.C. 479 to 431,
the outline of Thucydides (book i. chaps. 24 to 146) is of primary im-
portance, especially for the chronology; but the details must be filled
in from Diodorus (book xi. and first half of book xii.), and, as before,
from Plutarch and Nepos. (The latter has one " Life " only bearing
on this period, that of Cimon; the former has two, those of Cimon and
Pericles.) For most of the third portion of the period, the time of the
Peloponnesian War — B.C. 431 to 404 — we have the invaluable work of
Thucydides (books ii. to viii.) as our single and sufficient guide; but,
where the work of Thucydides breaks oflF, we must supplement his con-
tinuator, Xenophon (" Hellenica," books i. and ii.), by Diodorus (last
half of book xii.). For the fourth portion of the period, from the close
of the Peloponnesian War to the battle of Mantineia — B.C. 404 to 362 —
Xenophon in his " Hellenica," his " Anabasis," and his " Agesilaus,"
is our main authority: he is to be compared with Diodorus (books xiii.
to XV.), Nepos (" Vit. Lysand., Conon., Pelop., Epaminond., and
Ages."), and Plutarch ("Vit. Pelop., Artaxerxis, and Ages."). For
the remainder of the history — from B.C. 362 to 338 — in default of con-
temporary writers, we are thrown primarily on the sixteenth book of
Diodorus; but perhaps more real knowledge of the period is to be
derived from the speeches of the orators, especially those of Demos-
thenes and .^schines. The lives of Phocion and Demosthenes in Plu-
tarch, and those of Iphicrates, Chabrias, Timotheus, and Datames in
Nepos, further illustrate the period, which also receives some light
from Justin, Pausanias, and a few other authors.

ANCIENT HISTORY 141

sian War, Sparta was the state which exercised the greatest
centralizing force, and gave the most promise of uniting under
its leadership the scattered members of the Hellenic body.
Events prior to the Persian War had been gradually leading
up to the recognition of a Spartan headship. It required,
however, the actual occurrence of the war to bring rapidly to
maturity what hitherto had only existed in embryo — to place
at once vividly before the whole race the consciousness of
Hellenic unity, to drive Sparta to the assumption of leader-
ship, and to induce the other Greek states to acquiesce calmly
in the new position occupied by one of their number.

The beneficial influence of an extreme common danger was
not limited to the time of its actual existence. The tendency
towards consolidation, having once obtained a certain amount
of strength, did not disappear with the cause which brought it
into being. From the time of the Persian invasion, we notice
a general inclination of the Greeks to gather themselves to-
gether into confederations under leaders. The chief states,
Sparta, Athens, Boeotia, Argos, are recognized as possible
holders of such a hegemony ; and the history from this time
thus possesses a character of unity for which we look in vain at
an earlier period.

The first expedition of Mardonius having been frustrated,
in part by a storm, in part by the opposition of the Bryges, a
tribe of Thracians, it was resolved, before a second expedition
was sent out, to send heralds and summon the Greek States
severally to surrender. The result of this policy was striking.
The island states generally, and many of the continental ones,
made their submission. Few, comparatively, rejected the
overture. Athens and Sparta, however, marked their abhor-
rence of the proposal made them in the strongest possible way.
In spite of the universally-received law, that the persons of
heralds were sacred, they put the envoys of Darius to death,
and thus placed themselves beyond all possibility of further
parley with the enemy.

The victory of Marathon gave Greece a breathing-space be-
fore the decisive trial of strength between herself and Persia,
which was manifestly impending. No one conceived that the
danger was past, or that the Great King would patiently accept

142 RAWLINSON

his defeat, without seeking to avenge it. The ten years which
intervened between Marathon and Thermopylae were years of
preparation as much to Greece as to Persia. Athens espe-
cially, under the wise guidance of Themistocles, made herself
ready for the coming conflict by the application of her great
pecuniary resources to the increase of her navy, and by the
training of her people in nautical habits. The war between
this state and ^gina, which continued till B.C. 481, was very
advantageous to the Grecian cause, by stimulating these naval
efforts, and enabling Themistocles to persuade his country-
men to their good.

The military preparations of Darius in the years B.C. 489 to
487, and those of Xerxes in B.C. 48410 481, must have been
well known to the Greeks, who could not doubt the quarter in
which it was intended to strike a blow. Accordingly, we find
the year B.C. 481 given up to counter-preparations. A gen-
eral congress held at the Isthmus — a new feature in Greek his-
tory— arranged, or suppressed, the internal quarrels of the
states attending it ; assigned the command of the confederate
forces, both by land and sea, to Sparta ; and made an attempt
to obtain assistance from distant, or reluctant, members of the
Hellenic body — Argos, Crete, Corcyra, and Sicily. A resolu-
tion was at the same time taken to meet the invader at the ex-
treme northern boundary of Greece, where it was thought that
the pass of Tempe offered a favorable position for resistance.

The force sent to Thessaly, finding the pass of Tempe un-
tenable, withdraws at once ; and the position of Thermopylae
and Artemisium is chosen for the combined resistance to the
foe by sea and land. Though that position is forced, Attica
overrun, and Athens taken and burnt, in revenge for Sardis,
yet the defeat of his vast fleet at Salamis (B.C. 480) alarms
Xerxes, and causes him to retire with all his remaining vessels
and the greater part of his troops. Mardonius stays behind
with 350,000 picked men, and the fate of Greece has to be de-
termined by a land battle. This is fought the next year, B.C.
479, at Plataea, by the Spartan king, Pausanias, and the Athen-
ian general, Aristides, who with 69,000 men completely defeat
the Persian general, take his camp, and destroy his army. A
battle at Mycale (in Asia Minor), on the same day, effects the

ANCIENT HISTORY 143

destruction of the remnant of the Persian fleet ; and thus the
entire invading armament, both naval and mihtary, is swept
away, the attempt at conquest having issued in utter failure.

The discomfiture of the assailing force which had threatened
the liberties of Greece, while it was far from bringing the war
to an end, entirely changed its character. Greece now took
the offensive. Not content with driving her foe beyond her
borders, she aimed at pressing Persia back from the advanced
position which she had occupied in this quarter, regarding it as
menacing to her own security. At the same time, she pun-
ished severely the Grecian States which had invited or encour-
aged the invader. Moreover, she vindicated to herself, as the
natural consequence of the victories of Salamis and Mycale,
the complete command of the Levant, or Eastern Mediter-
ranean, and the sovereignty over all the littoral islands, includ-
ing Cyprus.

The new position into which Greece had been brought by
the course of events, a position requiring activity, enterprise,
the constant employment of considerable forces at a distance
from home, and the occupation of the ^Egean with a powerful
navy, led naturally to the great change which now took place
in Grecian arrangements — the withdrawal of Sparta from the
conduct of the Persian War, and the substitution of Athens as
leader. No doubt Sparta did not see at once all which this
change involved. The misconduct of Pausanias, who entered
into treasonable negotiations with Xerxes, and the want of
elasticity in her system, which unfitted her for distant foreign
wars, made Sparta glad to retire from an unpleasant duty, the
burden of which she threw upon Athens, without suspecting
the profit and advantage which that ambitious state would de-
rive from undertaking it. She did not suppose that she was
thereby yielding up her claim to the headship of all Greece at
home, or erecting Athens into a rival. She imagined that she
could shift on to a subordinate responsibilities which were too
much for her, without changing the attitude of that subordi-
nate towards herself. This was a fatal mistake, so far as her
own interests were concerned, and had to be redeemed at a
vast cost during a war which lasted, with short interruptions,
for the space of more than fifty years.

144 RAWLINSON

On Athens the change made by the transference of the lead-
ership had an effect which, if not really advantageous in all re-
spects, seemed at any rate for a time to be extraordinarily
beneficial. Her patriotic exertions during the war of invasion
appeared to have received thereby their due reward. She had
obtained a free vent for her superabundant activity, energy,
and enterprise. She was to be at the head of a league of the
naval powers of Greece, offensive and defensive, against Per-
sia. The original idea of the league was that of a free con-
federation. Delos was appointed as its centre. There the
Congress was to sit, and there was to be the common treasury.
But Athens soon converted her acknowledged headship
{fy^eiiovCa) into a sovereignty (apxv)- First, the right of states
to secede from the confederacy, which was left undecided by
the terms of the confederation, was denied ; and, upon its as-
sertion, was decided in the negative by the unanswerable argu-
ment of force. Next, the treasury was transferred from Delos
to Athens, and the meetings of the Congress were discontin-
ued. Finally, the separate treasury of the league was merged
in that of Athens; the money and ships of the allies were
employed for her own aggrandizement in whatever way Athens
pleased ; and the various members of the league, excepting a
few of the more powerful, were treated as Athenian subjects,
compelled to model their governments in accordance with
Athenian views, and even forced to allow all important causes
to be transferred by appeal from their own local courts to those
of the Imperial City. These changes, while they immensely
increased the wealth and the apparent importance and power
of Athens, did nevertheless, by arousing a deep and general
feeling of discontent among her subject-allies, introduce an
element of internal weakness into her system, which, when the
time of trial came, was sure to show itself and to issue in dis-
aster, if not in ruin.

Internal changes of considerable importance accompanied
this exaltation of Athens to the headship of an Empire. The
power of the Clisthenic strategi increased, while that of the old
archons declined until it became a mere shadow. The de-
mocracy advanced. By a law of Aristides, B.C. 478, the last
vestige of a property qualification was swept away, and every

ANCIENT HISTORY

Athenian citizen was made eligible to every office. The law-
courts were remodelled and systematized by Pericles, who also
introduced the plan of paying the poorer citizens for their at-
tendance. The old council of the Areopagus was assailed, its
political power destroyed, and its functions made simply judi-
cial. At the same time, however, certain conservative altera-
tions were introduced by way of balance. The establishment
of the Nomophylaces and the Nomothetae, together with the
institution of the Indictment for Illegality {ypa<f>r) irapapofuop)
had a decided tendency to check the over-rapid progress of
change. The practice of re-electing year after year a favorite
strategus gave to the republic something of the stability of
monarchy, and rendered fluctuations in policy less frequent
than they would otherwise have been, and less extreme.
Meanwhile, the convenient institution of ostracism diminished
the violence of party struggles, and preserved the state from
all attempts upon its liberties. The sixty years which followed
Salamis form, on the whole, the most brilliant period of Athe-
nian history, and exhibit to us the exceptional spectacle of a
full-blown democracy, which has nevertheless all the steadi-
ness, the firmness, and the prudent self-control of a limited
monarchy or other mixed government.

Athens also during this period became the most splendid
of Greek cities, and was the general resort of all who excelled
in literature or in the arts. The Parthenon, the Theseium, the
temple of Victory, the Propylaea were built, and adorned with
the paintings of Polygnotus and the exquisite sculptures of
Phidias and his school. Cimon and Pericles vied with each
other in the beautifying of the city of their birth ; and the en-
couragement which the latter especially gave to talent of every
kind, collected to Athens a galaxy of intellectual lights such as
is almost without parallel in the history of mankind. At the
same time, works of utility were not neglected, but advanced
at an equal pace with those whose character was ornamental.
The defenses of Athens were rebuilt immediately after the de-
parture of the Persians, and not long afterwards the fortifica-
tions were extended to the sea on either side by the " Long
Walls " to the two ports of Piraeus and Phalerum. The triple
harbor of Piraeus was artificially enlarged and strengthened.

146 RAWLINSON

New docks were made, and a town was laid out on a grand
plan for the maritime population, A magnificent force of tri-
remes was kept up, maintained always at the highest point of
efficiency. Colonies were moreover sent out to distant shores,
and new towns arose, at Amphipolis, Thurii, and elsewhere,
which reproduced in remote and barbarous regions the splen-
dor and taste of the mother city on a reduced scale.

Although Aristides was the chief under whom Athens ob-
tained her leadership, and Themistocles the statesman to
whom she owed it that she was thought of for such a position,
yet the guidance of the state on her new career was intrusted
to neither the one nor the other, but to Cimon. Aristides ap-
pears to have been regarded as deficient in military talent ; and
the dishonest conduct of Themistocles had rendered him justly
open to suspicion. It was thus to the son of the victor at
Marathon that the further humiliation of Persia was now com-
mitted.

The revolt of the Spartan Helots simultaneously with the
siege of Thasos, B.C. 464, was an event the importance of
which can scarcely be over-estimated. It led to the first actual
rupture of friendly relations between Athens and Sparta ; and
it occupied the attention of Sparta so completely for ten years
that she could do nothing during that time to check the rapid
advance which Athens made, so soon as she found herself free
to take whatever part she pleased in Grecian politics. It like-
wise caused the banishment of Cimon (B.C. 461) and the ele-
vation of Pericles to the chief direction of aflfairs — a change of
no small moment, being the substitution of a consummate
statesmen as chief of the state for a mere moderately skilful
general.

The ambition of Pericles aimed at securing to Athens the
first position in Greece both by land and sea. He understood
that Sparta would not tolerate such pretensions, and was pre-
pared to contest with that power the supremacy on shore.
But he believed that ultimately, in such a country as Greece,
the command of the sea would carry with it a predominant
power over the land also. He did not design to withdraw
Athens from her position of leader against Persia ; but, treating
the Persian War as a secondary and subordinate affair, he

ANCIENT HISTORY 147

wished to direct the main energies of his country towards the
acquisition of such authority and influence in central and
northern Greece as would place her on a par with Sparta as a
land power. At the same time, he sought to strengthen him-
self by alliances with such states of the Peloponnese as were
jealous of Sparta ; and he was willing, when danger threatened,
to relinquish the contest with Persia altogether, and to devote
all his efforts to the establishment of the supremacy of Athens
over Greece.

The culminating period of Athenian greatness was the in-
terval between CEnophyta and Coroneia, B.C. 456 to 447.
Pericles, who at the outset appeared likely to succeed in all
that he had planned, learned gradually by the course of events
that he had overrated his country's powers, and wisely acqui-
esced in the inevitable. From about B.C. 454 his aim was to
consolidate and conserve, not to enlarge, the dominion of
Athens. But the policy of moderation came too late. Bceo-
tia, Phocis, and Locris burned to be free, and determined to try
the chance of arms, so soon as a convenient occasion offered.
Coroneia came, and Athens was struck down upon her knees.
Two years later, on the expiration of the five years' peace (B.C.
445), Sparta arranged a combination which threatened her
rival with actual destruction. Megara on the one side and
Euboea on the other were stirred to revolt, while a Pelopon-
nesian force under Pleistoanax and Cleanridas invaded Attica
at Eleusis. But the crisis was met by Pericles with firmness
and wisdom. The Spartan leaders were accessible to bribes,
and the expenditure of a few talents relieved Athens from her
greatest danger. Euboea, the possession of which was of vital
consequence to the unproductive Attica, received a severe pun-
ishment for her disaffection at the hands of Pericles himself.
Megara, and a few outlying remnants of the land empire en-
joyed from B.C. 456 to 447, were made the price of peace. By
the cession of what it would have been impossible to retain,
Athens purchased for herself a long term of rest, during which
she might hope to recruit her strength and prepare herself to
make another struggle for the supremacy.

The struggle which now commenced is known by the name
of the " Peloponnesian War." It lasted twenty-seven years,

148 RAWLINSON

from B.C. 431 to 404, and extended itself over almost the whole
of the Grecian world, involving almost every state from Selinus
at the extreme west of Sicily to Cnidus and Rhodes in the
.^gean. Though in the main a war for supremacy between
the two great powers of Greece, Athens and Sparta, it was also
to a certain extent " a struggle of principles," and likewise,
though to a lesser extent, " a war of races." Speaking gen-
erally, the Ionian Greeks were banded together on the one
side, and made common cause with the Athenians ; while the
Dorian Greeks, with a few remarkable exceptions, gave their
aid to the Spartans. But political sympathy determined, to a
greater degree than race, the side to which each state should
attach itself. Athens and Sparta were respectively in the eyes
of the Greeks the representatives of the two principles of de-
mocracy and oligarchy ; and it was felt that, according as the
one or the other preponderated, the cause of oligarchical or
democratical government was in the ascendant. The prin-
ciple of non-intervention was unknown. ' Both powers alike
were propagandist; and revolutionized, as occasion offered,
the constitutions of their dependencies. Even without inter-
vention, party spirit was constantly at work, and the triumph
of a faction over its rival in this or that petty state might at any
time disturb the balance of power between the two chief bel-
ligerents.

These two belligerents offered a remarkable contrast to each
other in many respects. Athens was predominantly a mari-
time, Sparta a land power. Athens had influence chiefly on
the eastern side of Greece and in Asia ; Sparta, on the western
side of Greece, and in Italy and Sicily. Again, the position of
Sparta with respect to her allies was very different from that
of Athens.

Sparta was at the head of a purely voluntary confederacy,
the members of which regarded their interests as bound
up in hers, and accepted her, on account of her superior
military strength, as their natural leader. Athens was mis-
tress of an empire which she had acquired, to a considerable
extent, by force ; and was disliked by most of her subject-al-
lies, who accepted her leadership, not from choice, but from
compulsion. Thus Sparta was able to present herself before

ANCIENT HISTORY 149

men's minds in the character of " liberator of Greece ;" though,
had she obtained a complete ascendancy over the rest of
Greece, her yoke would probably have been found at least as
galling as the Athenian.

Among the principal advantages which Athens possessed
over Sparta at the commencement of the war was the better
arrangement of her finance. Sparta can scarcely be said to
have had a revenue at all. Her military expenses were met by
extraordinary contributions, which she and her allies levied
upon themselves, as occasion seemed to require. Athens, on
the contrary, had an organized system, which secured her an
annual revenue greatly exceeding her needs in time of peace,
and sufficient to support the whole expense of a moderate war.
When extraordinary efforts were required, she could fall back
on her accumulations, which were large ; or she could augment
her income by requiring from her citizens an increased rate of
property-tax.

The Peloponnesian War may be divided into three periods :
1st. From the commencement until the conclusion of the
Peace of Nicias — ten years — B.C. 431 to 421. 2d. From the
Peace of Nicias to its formal rupture by Sparta — eight years,
B.C. 421 to 413. 3d. From the rupture of the Peace of Nicias
to the capture of Athens — rather more than nine years — B.C.
413 to 404.

First Period. — The struggle was conducted for two years
and a half by Pericles ; then by Nicias, but under the check of
a strong opposition led by Cleon. Athens was continually
more and more successful up to B.C. 424, when the fortune of
war changed. The rash expedition into Boeotia in that year
lost Athens the flower of her troops at Delium; while the
genius of the young Spartan, Brasidas, first saved Megara, and
then, transferring the war into Thrace, threatened to deprive
the Athenians of the entire mass of their allies in this quarter.
The effort made to recover Amphipolis (B.C. 422) having
failed, and Athens fearing greatly the further spread of dis-
affection among her subject-cities, peace was made on terms
disadvantageous but not dishonorable to Athens — the general
principle of the peace being the statu quo ante bellum, but cer-
tain exceptions being made with regard to Plataea and the

150 RAWLINSON .

Thracian towns, which placed Athens in a worse position than
that which she held when the war began.

Second Period. — The continuance of hostilities during this
period, while there was peace, and even for some time alliance,
between the two chief belligerents, was attributable, at first,
to the hatred which Corinth bore to Athens, and to the en-
ergy which she showed in forming coalitions against her de-
tested rival. Afterwards it was owing also in part to the am-
bition and influence of Alcibiades, who desired a renewal of the
war, hoping thereby to obtain a sphere suitable to his talents.
Argos, during this period, rose for a time into consideration,
her alliance being sought on all hands ; but the battle of Man-
tinea, by destroying the flower of her troops, once more broke
her power, and her final gravitation to the Athenian side was
of no consequence.

Far more important than his Peloponnesian schemes wa6
the project, which Alcibiades now brought forward, of con-
quering Sicily. The success of this attempt would have com-
pletely destroyed the balance of power in Greece, and have
made Athens irresistible. The project, though perhaps some-
what over-bold, would probably have succeeded, had the task
of carrying it through to the end been intrusted to the genius
which conceived it. Unfortunately for Athens, she was forced
to choose between endangering her liberties by maintaining
Alcibiades in power and risking the failure of an expedition
to which she was too far committed for her to be able to re-
cede.

The recall of Alcibiades was injurious to Athens in various
ways. It deprived her of her best general, and of the only
statesman she possessed who was competerft to deal with all
the peculiar difficulties of the expedition. It made Sparta
fully acquainted with the Athenian schemes for the manage-
ment of Sicilian affairs, and so enabled her to counteract them.
Finally, it transferred to the enemy the most keen and subtle
intellect of the time, an intellect almost certain to secure suc-
cess to the side which it espoused. Still, if the choice lay (as
probably it did) between accepting Alcibiades as tyrant and
driving him into exile, we must hold Athens justified in the
course which she took. There might easily be a rapid recov-

ANCIENT HISTORY 151

cry from the effects of a disastrous expedition. Who could
predict the time at which the state would recover from the loss
of those liberties on which her prosperity had recently de-
pended ?

Third Period. — The maintenance of the " Peace of Nicias "
had long been rather nominal than real. Athens and Sparta
had indeed abstained hitherto from direct attacks upon each
other's territories ; but they had been continually employed in
plots against each other's interests, and they had met in con-
flict both in the Peloponnese and in Sicily. Now at length,
after eight years, the worn-out fiction of a pretended amity was
discarded ; and the Spartans, by the advice of Alcibiades, not
only once more invaded Attica, but made a permanent settle-
ment at Deceleia within sight of Athens. The main theatre of
the struggle continued, however, to be Sicily; where the
Athenians clung with desperation to a scheme which prudence
required them to relinquish, and lavishly sent fleet after fleet
and army after army to maintain a conflict which was hopeless.
Still the expedition might have re-embarked, without suffering
any irreparable disaster, had it not been for an improvement
in ship-building, devised by the Corinthians and eagerly adopt-
ed by the Syracusans, which deprived Athens of her command
of the sea, and forced her armies to surrender at discretion.
Thus the fatal blow, from which Athens never recovered, was
struck by the hatred of Corinth, which, in the course of a few
weeks, more than avenged the injuries of half a century.

The immediate result of the disasters in Sicily was the trans-
ference of the war to Asia Minor. Her great losses in ships
and sailors had so crippled the naval power of Athens, that her
command of the sea was gone ; the more so, as her adversaries
were strengthened by the accession to their fleet of a powerful
Sicilian contingent. The knowledge of this entire change in
the relative position of the two belligerents at sea, encouraged
the subject-allies generally to shake off the Athenian yoke,
Sparta saw the importance of encouraging this defection ; and
crossing the ^gean Sea in force, made the theatre of war Asia
Minor, the islands, and the Hellespont. Here, for the first
time, she was able to make the Persian alliance, which she had
so long sought, of use to her. Persian gold enabled her to

iSa

RAWLINSON

maintain a fleet equal or superior to that of Athens, and ulti-
mately gave her the victory in the long doubtful contest.

What most surprises us, in the third and last period of the
war, is the vigor of the Athenian defense; the elasticity of
spirit, the energy, and the fertility of resource which seemed
for a time to have completely surmounted the Sicilian calamity,
and made the final issue once more appear to be doubtful.
This wonderful recovery of strength and power was, no doubt,
in a great measure due to the genius of one man — Alcibiades.
But something must be attributed to the temper and character
of the people. Athens, like Rome, is the greatest and most
admirable in misfortune ; it is then that her courage, her pa-
tience, and her patriotism deserve and command our sympa-
thies.

The arrival of the younger Cyrus in Asia Minor was of great
advantage to Sparta, and must be regarded as mainly effective
in bringing the war rapidly to a successful issue. Hitherto
the satraps had pursued the policy which the interests of Persia
required, had trimmed the balance, and contrived that neither
side should obtain a decided preponderance over the other.
But Cyrus had personal views, which such a course would not
have subserved. He required the assistance of Greek troops
and ships in the great enterprise that he was meditating ; and,
to obtain such aid, it was necessary for him to make a real
friend of one belligerent or the other. He chose Sparta, as
best suited to furnish him the aid he required; and, having
made his choice, he threw himself into the cause with all the
energy of his nature. It was his prompt and lavish generosity
which prevented the victory of Arginusae from being of any
real service to Athens, and enabled Lysander to undo its ef-
fects and regain the mastery of the sea, within the space of
thirteen months, by the crowning victory of ^gos-potami.
That victory may also have been in another way the result of
Lysander's command of Persian gold ; for it is a reasonable
suspicion that some of the Athenian commanders were bribed,
and that the negligence which lost the battle had been paid for
out of the stores of Cyrus.

The internal history of Athens during the third period of the
Peloponnesian War is full of interest. The disastrous termi-

ANCIENT HISTORY 153

nation of the Sicilian expedition threw discredit upon demo-
cratical institutions; and immediately after the news of it
reached Athens, the constitution was modified in an aristo-
cratic direction, B.C. 412. The change, however, then made
was not regarded as sufficient; and in B.C. 411 a more com-
plete revolution was effected. Cowed by a terrorism which
the political clubs knew well how to exercise, the Athenian
democracy submitted to see itself abolished in a perfectly legal
manner. A nominated Council of 400 succeeded to the elect-
ive fiovXr) ; and a pretended committee of 5000 took the place
of the time-honored iKKKrjaia. This government, which was
practically that of three or four individuals, lasted for about
four months, when it was overthrown by violence, and the de-
mocracy was restored again under certain restrictions.

The triumph of Sparta was the triumph throughout Greece
of oligarchical principles. At Athens the democracy was
abolished, and the entire control of the government placed in
the hands of a Board of Thirty, a board which has acquired in
history the ominous name of " The Thirty Tyrants." Boards
of Ten (SeKapxiat), chosen by himself, were set up by Lysander
as the supreme authority in Samos and in other cities, while
Spartan " harmosts," with indefinite powers, were established
everywhere. The Greeks found that, instead of gaining by
the change of masters, they had lost ; they had exchanged the
yoke of a power, which, if rapacious, was at any rate refined,
civilized, and polished, for that of one which added to rapacity
a coarse arrogance and a cruel harshness which were infinitely
exasperating and offensive. Even in the matter of the tribute
there was no relaxation, Sparta found that, to maintain an
empire, she must have a revenue ; and the contributions of her
subject-allies were assessed at the annual rate of 1000 talents
(£243,000).

The expedition of the Ten Thousand, B.C. 401 to 400, be-
longs less to the history of Greece than to that of Persia ; but
it had some important consequences on the after course of
Greek policy. The weakness of Persia was laid bare ; it was
seen that her capital might be reached, and that Greek troops
might march in security from end to end of the Empire. Hith-
erto even the attacks of the Greeks on Persian territory had

154

RAWLINSON

been in a measure defensive, having for their object the secur-
ity of European Hellas, or the liberation of the Greek cities in
Asia. Henceforth ideas of actual conquest floated before the
Grecian mind ; and the more restless spirits looked to this quar-
ter as the best field for their ambition. On the side of the Per-
sians, alarm at the possible results of Greek audacity began to
be felt, and a new policy was developed in consequence. The
Court of Susa henceforth took an active part in the Greek
struggles, allying itself continually with one side or the other,
and employing the treasures of the state in defraying the cost
of Greek armaments, or in corrupting Greek statesmen.
Finally, Persia came to be viewed as the ultimate arbiter of the
Greek quarrels ; and rescripts of the Great King at once im-
posed peace on the belligerents, and defined the terms on
which it should be concluded.

The immediate consequence of the Cyreian expedition was
war between Sparta and Persia. Sparta was known to have
lent her aid to Cyrus ; and Tissaphernes had orders, on his re-
turn to the coast, to retaliate by severities on the Greek cities,
which were now under the protection of the Spartans. The
challenge thus thrown down was readily accepted ; and for six
years — B.C. 399 to 394 — Sparta carried on war in Asia Minor,
first under generals of no great talent, but, finally, under Age-
silaiis, who succeeded in making the Great King tremble for
his empire. The consequences would probably have been
serious, if Persia had not succeeded in effecting a combination
against the Spartans in Greece itself, which forced them to re-
call Agesilaiis from Asia.

Instigated by the Persians, and jealous of the power of
Sparta, Argos, Thebes, Corinth, and Athens formed an alli-
ance against her in the year B.C. 395. A war of a checkered
character followed. Sparta lost the command of the sea by
the great victory of Conon at Cnidus, but maintained her su-
periority on land in the battles of Corinth, Coronaea, and Le-
chaeum. Still she found the strain upon her resources so
great, and the difficulty of resisting the confederation, sup-
ported as it was by the gold and the ships of Persia, so extreme,
that after a few years she felt it necessary to procure peace at
any cost. It was at her instance, and by her energetic exer-

ANCIENT HISTORY

«55

tions, that Persia was induced to come forward in the new
character of arbiter, and to require the acceptance by the
Greeks generally of the terms contained in the " Peace of
Antalcidas " — terms disgraceful to the Greeks, but advanta-
geous to Sparta, as the clause establishing the independence of
all the Greek states (TroXew) injured Corinth and Thebes, while
it left her own power untouched.

The immediate consequences of the " Peace of Antalcidas "
were the separation of Corinth from Argos, and the deposi-
tion of Thebes from her hegemony over the Boeotian cities.
The re-establishment of Plataea followed, a judicious measure
on the part of Sparta, tending to produce estrangement be-
tween Thebes and Athens. Sparta was now at the zenith of
her power. Claiming the right of seeing to the execution of
the treaty which she had negotiated, she extended her influ-
ence on all sides, nowhere meeting with resistance. But the
intoxication of success had its usual effect in developing sel-
fishness and arrogance — fatal defects in a ruling state, always
stirring up sentiments of hostility, which sooner or later pro-
duce the downfall of the power that provokes them. The
domineering insolence which dictated to Mantineia and Phlius,
might indeed, if confined to those cities, or others like them,
have had no ill results ; but when, in time of peace, the citadel
of Thebes was occupied, and the act, if not commanded, was at
least approved and adopted by Sparta, the bitter enmity of one
of the most powerful states of Greece was aroused, and every
other state was made to feel that, in its turn, it might by some
similar deed be deprived of independence. But the aggressor
was for the time triumphant ; and having no open enemy now
within the limits of Greece Proper, sought one on the borders
of Thrace and Macedon, where, under the headship of 01)11-
thus, a powerful confederacy was growing up, consisting in
part of Greek, in part of Macedonian, cities. A war of four
years, B.C. 382 to 379, sufficed to crush this rising power, and
thus to remove from Northern Greece the only rival which
Macedon had seriously to fear — the only state which, by its
situation, its material resources, and its numerical strength,
might have offered a considerable obstacle to the advance of
the Macedonian kings to empire.

156 RAWLINSON

Thus far success had attended every enterprise of Sparta,
however cruel or wicked ; but at length the day of retribution
came. Pelopidas and his friends effected a bloody revolution
at Thebes, recovered the Cadmeia, expelling the Spartan gar-
rison, and set about the restoration of the old Boeotian league.
Athens, injured and insulted, declared war against her old
rival, made alliance with Thebes, revived her old confederacy
on fair and equitable terms, and recovered the empire of the
seas by the victories of Naxos and Leucas. All the efforts of
Sparta against her two antagonists failed, and after seven years
of unsuccessful war she was reduced to make a second appeal
to Persia, who once more dictated the terms on which peace
was to be made. Athens, now grown jealous of Thebes, was
content to sign, and her confederates followed her lead ; but
Thebes by the mouth of Epaminondas declined, unless she
were recognized as head of Boeotia. As Sparta positively re-
fused to admit this claim, Thebes was publicly and formally
excluded from the Treaty of Peace.

Sparta now, having only Thebes to contend with, imagined
that her triumph was secure, and sent her troops into Bceotia
under Cleombrotus, hoping to crush and destroy Thebes.
But the magnificent victory of Epaminondas at Leuctra — the
fruit at once of extraordinary strategic skill at the time, and of
an excellent training of his soldiers previously — dashed all
these hopes to the ground. Sparta fell, suddenly and forever,
from her high estate. Almost all Central Greece joined
Thebes. Arcadia rose and began to organize itself as a federa-
tion. The Lacedaemonian harmosts were expelled from all
the cities, and the philo-Laconian party was everywhere put
down. Epaminondas, moreover, as soon as the murder of
Jason of Pherae left him free to act, redoubled his blows. En-
tering the Peloponnese, he ravaged the whole Spartan terri-
tory at will, and even threatened the city ; which Agesilaiis with
some difficulty preserved. But these temporary losses and dis-
graces were as nothing compared with the permanent injuries
which the prudent policy of the Theban leader inflicted on his
foe, in the constitution of the Arcadian league and foundation
of Megalopolis ; and, still more, in the re-establishment of an
independent Messenia and the building of Messene, Hence-

ANCIENT HISTORY

157

forth Sparta was a second-rate rather than first-rate power.
She ceased to exercise a hegemony, and was territorially not
much larger than Arcadia or Argos.

In her distress, Sparta makes appeal to Athens for aid ; and
an alliance is formed between these two powers on terms of
equality, which is joined after a time by Achaea, Elis, and even
by most of Arcadia, where a jealousy of Theban power and
interference is gradually developed. Thebes, partly by mis-
management, partly by the mere circumstance of her being
now the leading state, arouses hostility, and loses ground in
the Peloponnese, which she endeavors to recover by obtaining
and exhibiting a Persian rescript, declaring her the head of
Greece, and requiring the other states to submit to her under
pain of the Great King's displeasure. But missives of this
character have now lost their force. The rescript is gener-
ally rejected ; and the power of Thebes in the Peloponnese con-
tinues to decline.

Meanwhile, however, she was extending her influence in
Northern Greece, and even beyond its borders. Her armies
were sent into Thessaly, where they contended with Alexander
of Pherae, the brother of Jason, and, after some reverses, suc-
ceeded in reducing him to dependence. All Thessaly, to-
gether with Magnesia and Achaea Phthiotis, were thus brought
under her sway. In Macedonia, she arbitrated between the
different claimants of the throne, and took hostages, among
whom was the young prince Philip, Her fleet about the same
time proceeded to the coast of Asia.

But the honor of Thebes required that her influence should
be re-established in the Peloponnese, and her friends there re-
leased from a situation which had become one of danger. Ac-
cordingly, in B.C. 362, Epaminondas once more took the field,
and entering the Peloponnese, was within a little of surprising
Sparta. Disappointed, however, of this prey by the activity of
Agesilaiis, and of Mantineia by the sudden arrival of an Athe-
nian contingent, he brought matters to a decision by a pitched
battle ; in which, repeating the tactics of Leuctra, he once more
completely defeated the Spartans and their allies, dying, how-
ever, in the arms of victory, B.C. 362. His death almost com-
pensated Sparta for her defeat, since he left no worthy sue-

158 RAWLINSON

cessor, and Thebes, which he and his friend Pelopidas had
raised to greatness, sank back at once to a level with several
other powers.

The result of the struggle which Sparta had provoked by her
seizure of the Theban citadel was the general exhaustion of
Greece. No state was left with any decided predominance.
The loss of all in men and money was great ; and the battle of
Mantineia deprived Greece of her ablest general. If profit was
derived by any state from the war, it was by Athens, who re-
covered her maritime superiority (since the attempt of Epami-
nondas to establish a rival navy proved a failure), reconsti-
tuted her old confederacy, and even, by the occupation of
Samos and the Chersonese, began to restore her empire. In
Macedonia her influence to some extent balanced that of
Thebes.

The general exhaustion naturally led to a peace, which was
made on the principle of leaving things as they were. The
independence of Messene and the unification of Arcadia were
expressly recognized, while the headship of Thebes and Athens
over their respective confederacies was tacitly sanctioned.
Sparta alone declined to sign the terms, since she would on no
account forego her right to reconquer Messenia. She had no
intention, however, of making any immediate appeal to arms,
and allowed her king, Agesilaiis, to quit Sparta and take ser-
vice under the native monarch of Egypt.

The peace of B.C. 362 was not disturbed on the continent o{
Greece till after the lapse of six years. Meanwhile, however,
hostilities continued at sea between Alexander of Pherae and
Athens, and, in the continental districts beyond the limits of
Greece Proper, between Athens on the one hand, and Am-
phipolis, Pediccas of Macedon, and the Thracian princes, Cotys
and his son Cersobleptes, on the other. Athens was intent on
recovering her old dominion in these parts, while the Mace-
donian and Thracian kings were naturally jealous of her grow-
ing power. Nothing, however, as yet showed that any im-
portant consequences would arise out of these petty struggles.
Macedonia was still one of the weakest of the states which bor-
dered on Greece ; and even when, on the death of Perdiccas,
B.C. 359, his brother, Philip, who had escaped from Thebes,

ANCIENT HISTORY

>59

mounted the throne, it was impossible for the most sagacious
intellect to foresee danger to Greece from this quarter.

The year B.C. 358 was the culminating point of the second
period of Athenian prosperity. Athens had once more made
herself mistress of the Chersonese ; she had recovered Eubcea,
which had recently attached itself to Thebes ; and she had ob-
tained from Philip the acknowledgment of her right to Am-
phipolis, when the revolt of a considerable number of her more
distant allies engaged her in the " Social War," the results of
which injured her greatly. The war cost her the services of
her three best generals, Chabrias, Timotheus, and Iphicrates ;
exhausted her treasury, and permanently diminished her re-
sources. It likewise greatly tarnished her half-recovered
reputation.

The period of the " Social War " was also disastrous for
Athens in another respect. So completely did the struggle
with her allies occupy her attention, so incapable was she at
this period of carrying on more than one war at a time, that
she allowed Philip to absorb, one after another, Amphipolis,
Pydna, Potidaea, and Methone, and thus to sweep her from the
Thermaic Gulf, almost without offering resistance. At first,
indeed, she was cajoled by the crafty monarch ; but, even when
the mask was thrown oflF, she made no adequate effort, but
patiently allowed the establishment of Macedonian ascendency
over the entire region extending from the Peneus to the Nes-
tus.

Before the " Social War " had come to an end, another ex-
hausting struggle — fatal to Greece in its consequences — was
begun in the central region of Hellas, through the vindictive-
ness of Thebes. Down to the battle of Leuctra, Phocis had
fought on the Spartan side, and had thus provoked the enmity
of Thebes, who now resolved on her destruction. The Am-
phictyonic assembly suffered itself to be made the tool of the
oppressors; and by condemning Phocis to a fine which she
could not possibly pay, compelled her to fight for her exist-
ence. A war followed, in which Phocis, by the seizure and ex-
penditure of the Delphic treasures, and the assistance, in some
important conjuncture, of Achaea, Athens, and Sparta, main-
tained herself for eleven years against Thebes and her allies.

l6o RAWLINSON

At last Thebes, blinded by her passionate hatred, called in
Philip to her assistance, and thus purchased the destruction of
her enemy at a cost which involved her own ruin and that of
Greece generally.

The ruin of Greece was now rapidly consummated. Within
six years of the submission and punishment of Phocis, Philip
openly declared war against Athens, the only power in Greece
capable of offering him any important opposition. His efforts
at first were directed towards obtaining the command of the
Bosphorus and Hellespont ; but the second " Sacred War "
gave him a pretext for marching his forces through Ther-
moplyae into Central Greece ; and though Thebes and Athens
joined to oppose him, the signal victory of Chaeroneia (B.C.
338) laid Greece prostrate at his feet. All the states, excepting
Sparta, at once acknowledged his supremacy; and, to mark
distinctly the extinction of independent Hellas, and its absorp-
tion into the Macedonian monarchy, Philip was, in B.C. 337,
formally appointed generalissimo of united Greece against the
Persians. His assassination in the next year excited hopes,
but produced no real change. The aspirations of the patriotic
party in Greece after freedom were quenched in the blood
which deluged revolted Thebes, B.C. 335 ; and assembled
Greece at Corinth once more admitted the headship of Mace-
don, and conferred on the youthful Alexander the dignity
previously granted to his father.

BOOK IV
HISTORY OF MACEDONIA

BOOK IV.

HISTORY OF THE MACEDONIAN MONARCHY.

GEOGRAPHICAL OUTLINE.

Macedonia Proper was the country lying immediately to the
north of Thessaly, between Mount Scardus on the one hand
and the maritime plain of the Pierians and Bottiaeans (Thra-
cians) on the other. It was bounded towards the north by Pae-
onia, or the country of the Paeonians, from which it was sep-
arated by an irregular line, running probably a little north of
the 41st parallel. Its greatest length from north to south was
about ninety miles, while its width from east to west may have
averaged seventy miles. Its area was probably not much short
of 6000 square miles, or about half that of Belgium.

The character of the tract comprised within these limits was
multiform, but for the most part fertile. High mountain-
chains, capped with snow during the gfreater part of the year,
and very varied in the directions that they take, divide the
territory into a number of distinct basins. Some of these have
a lake in the centre, into which all the superfluous moisture
drains ; others are watered by rivers, which, with one excep-
tion, flow eastward to the Mgean. In both cases the basins
are of large extent, oflfering to the eye the appearance of a suc-
cession of plains. The more elevated regions are for the most
part richly wooded, and abound with sparkling rivulets, deep
gorges, and frequent waterfalls; but in places this character
gives way to one of dulness and monotony, the traveller pass-
ing for miles over a succession of bleak downs and bare hill
sides, stony and shrubless.

The principal Rivers of the region were the Lydias, or Lu-
dias, now the Karasmak, and the Haliacmon, now the Vistritza.

163

x64 RAWLINSON

Besides these, there was a third stream of some importance,
the Erigon, a tributary of the Axius. The chief Lakes were
those of Castoria, on a tributary of the Hahacmon, of Begor-
ritis (Ostrovo ?) in the country of the Eordaeans, and the Lyd-
ias Palus, near Pella.

Macedonia was divided into " Upper " and " Lower." Up-
per Macedonia comprised the whole of the broad mountainous
tract which lay between Scardus and Bermius, while Lower
Macedonia was the comparatively narrow strip along the east-
ern flank and at the foot of Bermius, between that range and
the tracts known as Pieria and Bottisea. Upper Macedonia
was divided into a number of districts, which for the most
part took their names from the tribes inhabiting them. The
principal were, to the north, Pelagonia and Lyncestis, on the
river Erigon ; to the west, Orestis and Elymeia, on the upper
Haliacmon ; and in the centre, Eordaea, about Lake Begorritis.

HISTORICAL SKETCH.
FIRST PERIOD.

From the Commencement of the Monarchy to the Death of
Alexander the Great, about B.C. 700 to B.C. 323.*

According to the tradition generally accepted by the Greeks,
the Macedonian kingdom, which under Philip and Alexander
attained to such extraordinary greatness, was founded by Hel-
lenic emigrants from Argos. The Macedonians themselves

* Sources. For the first two centuries Macedonian history is almost
a blank, nothing but a few names and some mythic tales being preserved
to us in Herodotus. That writer is the best authority for the reigns
of Amyntas I. and his son Alexander; but he must be supplemented
from Thucydides (ii. 99) and Justin. Thucydides is the chief authority
for the reign of Perdiccas. For the period from Archelaus to Alexander
we depend mainly on Justin and Diodorus. Philip's history, however,
may be copiously illustrated from the Attic orators, especially ^schines
and Demosthenes; but these partisan writers must not be trusted im-
plicitly. On the history of Alexander the most trustworthy of the
ancient authorities is Arrian (" Expeditio Alexandri "), who followed
contemporary writers, especially Aristobulus and Ptolemy Lagi. Some
interesting particulars are also furnished by Plutarch (" Vit. Alex."),

ANCIENT HISTORY 165

were not Hellenes ; they belonged to the barbaric races, not
greatly diflfering from the Greeks in ethnic type, but far behind
them in civilization, which bordered Hellas upon the north.
They were a distinct race, not Pseonian, not lUyrian, not Thra-
cian ; but, of the three, their connection was closest with the
Illyrians. The Argive colony, received hospitably, gradually
acquired power in the region about Mount Bermius ; and Per-
diccas, one of the original emigrants, was (according to Herod-
otus) acknowledged as king. (Other writers mentioned three
kings anterior to Perdiccas, whose joint reigns covered the
space of about a century.) The period which follows is one
of great obscurity, little being known of it but the names of
the kings.

With Amyntas I., who was contemporary with Darius Hys-
taspis, light dawns upon Macedonian history. We find that
by this time the Macedonian monarchs of this line had made
themselves masters of Pieria and Bottiaea, had crossed the
Axius and conquered Mygdonia and Anthemus, had dislodged
the original Eordi from Eordia and themselves occupied it,
and had dealt similarly with the Almopes in Alniopia, on the
Rhaedias. But the advance of the Persians into Europe gave
a sudden check to this period of prosperity. After a submis-
sion which was more nominal than real, in B.C. 507, the Mace-
donians, in B.C. 492, became Persian subjects, retaining, how-
ever, their own kings, who accepted the position of tributaries.
Amyntas I., who appears to have died about B.C. 498, was
succeeded by his son, Alexander I., king at the time of the
great invasion of Xerxes, who played no unimportant part in
the expedition, B.C. 480 to 470.

The repulse of the Persians set Macedonia free; and the
career of conquest appears to have been at once resumed.
Crestonaea and Bisaltia were reduced, and the Macedonian
dominion pushed eastward almost to the Strymon. The au-

Nearchus ("Periplus"), and Diodorus (book xvii.). The biography
of Q. Curtius is a rhetorical cxercitation, on which it is impossible to
place any dependence. (A good edition of the '* Periplus of Ncarchus,"
the only writing of a companion of Alexander that has come down to
us. is contained in C. Miiller's " Gcographi Graeci Minores." Paris,
185s; 2 vols., tall 8vo.)

i66 RAWLINSON

thority of the monarchs of Pella was likewise extended over
most of the inland Macedonian tribes, as the Lyncestae, the
Eleimiots, and others, who however retained their own kings.

But Macedonia was about this time herself exposed to
attacks from two unquiet neighbors. The maritime con-
federacy of Athens, which gave her a paramount authority
over the Greek cities in Chalcidice and even over Me-
thone in Pieria, brought the Athenians into the near neigh-
borhood of Macedon, and necessitated relations between the
two powers, which were at first friendly, but which grew to be
hostile when Athens by her colony at AmphipoHs put a check
to the further progress of Macedon in that direction ; and were
still more embittered by the encouragement which Athens gave
to Macedonian chiefs who rebelled against their sovereign.
About the same time, a powerful Thracian kingdom was formed
under Sitalces, B.C. 440 to 420, which threatened destruction
to the far smaller Macedonian state with which it was conter-
minous. Macedonia, however, under the adroit Perdiccas, es-
caped both dangers; and, on the whole, increased in pros-
perity.

The reign of Archelaiis, the bastard son of Perdiccas II.,
though short, was very important for Macedon, since this
prince laid the foundation of her military greatness by the at-
tention which he paid to the army, while at the same time he
strengthened and improved the country by the construction
of highways and of forts. He was also the first of the Mace-
donian princes who endeavored to encourage among his people
a taste for Greek literature. Euripides the tragedian was wel-
comed to his court, as also was Plato the philosopher, and per-
haps Hellanicus the historian. He engaged in wars with some
of the Macedonian princes, as particularly with Arrhibaeus;
but he was relieved from all hostile collision with Athens by
the Sicilian disaster. The character of Archelaiis was sanguin-
ary and treacherous ; in his habits he was licentious. After
reigning fourteen years, he was assassinated by the victims
of his lust, B.C. 399.

The murder of Archelaiis introduced a period of disturbance,
both internal and external, which lasted till the accession of
Philip, B.C. 359. During this interval the Macedonian court

ANCIENT HISTORY 167

was a constant scene of plots and assassinations. The direct
line of succession having failed, numerous pretenders to the
crown sprang up, who at different times found supporters in
the Illyrians, the Lacedaemonians, the Thebans, and the Athe-
nians. Civil wars were almost perpetual. Kings were driven
from their thrones and recovered them. There were at least
two regencies. So violent were the commotions that it seemed
doubtful whether the kingdom could long continue to maintain
its existence ; and, if the Olynthian league had been allowed
to constitute itself without interference, it is not unlikely that
Macedon would have been absorbed, either by that confeder-
acy or by the Illyrians.

The reig^ of Philip is the turning-point in Macedonian his-
tory. Hitherto, if we except Archelaiis, Macedonia had not
possessed a single king whose abilities exceeded the common
average, or whose aims had about them any thing of gp-andeur.
Notwithstanding their asserted and even admitted Hellenism,
the " barbarian " character of their training and associations
had its effect on the whole line of sovereigns; and their
highest qualities were the rude valor and the sagacity border-
ing upon cunning which are seldom wanting in savages. But
Philip was a monarch of a different stamp. In natural ability
he was at least the equal of any of his Greek contemporaries ;
while the circumstances under which he grew to manhood
were peculiarly favorable to the development of his talents.
At the impressible age of fifteen, he was sent as a hostage to
Thebes, where he resided for the greater part of three years
(B.C. 368 to 365), while that state was at the height of its pros-
perity under Pelopidas and Epaminondas. He was thus
brought into contact with those great men, was led to study
their system, and emulate their actions. He learnt the great
importance of military training, and the value of inventiveness
to those who wish to succeed in war ; he also acquired a facility
of expressing himself in Greek, which was uncommon in a
Macedonian.

The situation of Philip at his accession was one of extreme
embarrassment and difficulty. Besides Amyntas, his nephew,
for whom he at first professed to be regent, there were at least
five pretenders to the throne, two of whom, Pausanias and

i68 RAWLINSON

Argaeus, were supported by the arms of foreigners. The Illyr-
ians, moreover, had recently gained a great victory over Per-
diccas, and, flushed with success, had advanced into Macedonia
and occupied most of the western provinces. Pseonia on the
north, and Thrace upon the east, were unquiet neighbors,
whose hostility might be counted on whenever other perils
threatened. Within two years, however, Philip had repressed
or overthrown all these enemies, and found himself free to
commence those wars of aggression by which he converted the
monarchy of Macedon into an empire.

Hitherto it had been the policy of Philip to profess himself
a friend of the Athenians. Now, however, that his hands were
free, it was his first object to disembarrass himself of these
near neighbors, who blocked up his coast-line, watched his
movements, and might seriously interfere with the execution
of his projects. Accordingly, towards the close of B.C. 358,
when Athens was already engaged in the " Social War," he
suddenly laid siege to Amphipolis. Having taken the town,
while he amused Athens with promises, he proceeded to attack
and capture Pydna and Potidaea, actual Athenian possessions,
making over the latter to Olynthus, to foment jealousy between
her and Athens. He then conquered the entire coast district
between the Strymon and the Nestus, thus becoming master
of the important Thracian gold-mines, from which he shortly
derived an annual revenue of a thousand talents !

The year after these conquests we find Philip in Thessaly,
where he interferes to protect the Aleuadae of Larissa against
the tyrants of Pherse. The tyrants call in the aid of the Pho-
cians, then at the zenith of their power, and Philip suffers
certain reverses ; but a few years later he is completely vic-
torious, defeats and kills Onomarchus, and brings under his
dominion the whole of Thessaly, together with Magnesia and
Achsea Phthiotis. At the same time, he conquers Methone,
the last Athenian possession on the coast of Macedon, attacks
Maroneia, and threatens the Chersonese. Athens, the sole
power which could effectually have checked these successes,
made only slight and feeble efforts to prevent them. Already
Philip had found the advantage of having friends among the
Attic orators ; and their labors, backed by the selfish indolence

ANCIENT HISTORY 169

which now characterized the Athenians, producea an inaction,
which had the most fatal consequences.

The victory of Phihp over Onomarchus roused Athens to
exertion. Advancing to Thermopylae, Philip found the pass
already occupied by an Athenian army, and did not venture
to attack it. Greece was saved for the time; but six years
later the folly of the Thebans, and the fears of the Athenians,
who were driven to despair by the ill success of the Olynthian
and Euboic wars, admitted the Macedonian conqueror within
the barrier. Accepted as head of the league against the impi-
ous Phocians, Philip in a few weeks brought the " Sacred
War " to an end, obtaining as his reward the seat in the Am-
phictyonic Council of which the Phocians were deprived, and
thus acquiring a sort of right to intermeddle as much as he
liked in the affairs of Central and even Southern Hellas.

The main causes of Philip's wonderful success were twofold :
— Bettering the lessons taught him by his model in the art
of war, Epaminondas, he had armed, equipped, and trained
the Macedonian forces till they were decidedly superior to the
troops of any state in Greece. The Macedonian phalanx, in-
vincible until it came to be opposed to the Romans, was his
conception and his work. Nor was he content with excellence
in one arm of the service. On every branch he bestowed equal
care and thought. Each was brought into a state nearly ap-
proaching perfection. His cavalry, heavy and light, his pel-
tasts, archers, slingers, darters, were all the best of their kind ;
his artillery was numerous and eflfective; his commissariat
service was well arranged. At the same time, he was a master
of finesse. Taking advantage of the divided condition of
Greece, and of the general prevalence of corruption among
the citizens of almost every community, he played off state
against state and politician against politician. Masking his
purposes up to the last moment, promising, cajoling, bribing,
intimidating, protesting, he advanced his interests even more
by diplomacy than by force, having an infinite fund of artifice
from which to draw, and scarcely ever recurring to means
which he had used previously,

Philip had made peace with Athens in order to lay hold on
Thermopylae — a hold which he never afterwards relaxed. But

I70 RAWLINSON

it was far from his intention to maintain the peace an hour
longer than suited his purpose. Having once more chastised
the lUyrian and Pseonian tribes, he proceeded to invade East-
ern Thrace, and to threaten the Athenian possessions in that
quarter. At the same time, he aimed at getting into his hands
the command of the Bosphorus, which would have enabled him
to starve Greece into submission by stopping the importation
of corn. Here, however, Persia (which had at last come to feel
alarm at his progress) combined with Athens to resist him.
Perinthus and Byzantium were saved, and the ambition of
Philip was for the time thwarted.

But the indefatigable warrior, balked of his prey, and obliged
to wait till Grecian affairs should take a turn more favorable
to him, marched suddenly northward and engaged in a cam-
paign on the Lower Danube against a Scythian prince who
held the tract now known as Bulgaria. Victorious here, he
recrossed the Balkan with a large body of captives, when he
was set upon by the Triballi (Thracians), defeated, and wound-
ed in the thigh, B.C. 339. The wound necessitated a short
period of inaction ; but while the arch-plotter rested, his agents
were busily at work, and the year of the Triballian defeat saw
the fatal step taken, which was once more to bring a Mace-
donian army into the heart of Greece, and to destroy the last
remaining chance of the cause of Hellenic freedom.

Appointed by the Amphictyons as their leader in a new
" Sacred War," Philip once more passed Thermopylae and
entered Phocis. But he soon showed that he came on no
trivial or temporary errand. The occupation of Nicsea, Cytini-
um, and more especially of Elateia, betrayed his intention of
henceforth holding possession of Central Greece, and roused
the two principal powers of the region to a last desperate ef-
fort. Thebes and Athens met him at Chseroneia in full force,
with contingents from Corinth, Phocis, and Achaea. But the
Macedonian phalanx was irresistible ; and the complete defeat
of the allies laid Greece at Philip's feet. The Congress of Cor-
inth (B.C. 337), attended by all the states except Sparta, which
proudly stood aloof, accepted the headship of Macedon ; and
the cities generally undertook to supply contingents to the
force which he designed to lead against Persia.

ANCIENT HISTORY 171

This design, however, was not executed. Great prepara-
tions were made in the course of B.C. 337 ; and early in B.C.
336 the vanguard of the Macedonian army was sent across
into Asia. But, a few months later, the sword of Pausanias
terminated the career of the Macedonian monarch, who fell
a victim, in part to his unwillingness, or his inability to execute
justice upon powerful offenders, in part to the quarrels and
dissensions in his own family. Olympias certainly, Alexander
probably, connived at the assassination of Philip, whose re-
moval was necessary to their own safety. He died at the age
of forty-seven, after a reig^ of twenty-three years.

It is difficult to say what exactly was the government of
Macedonia under this prince. Practically, the monarch must
have been nearly absolute ; but it would appear that, theoret-
ically, he was bound to govern according to certain long-
established laws and customs; and it may be questioned
whether he would have dared at any time to transgress, fla-
grantly and openly, any such law or usage. The Macedonian
nobles were turbulent and free of speech. If accused of con-
spiracy or other crime, they were entitled to be tried before
the public assembly. Their power must certainly have been
to some extent a check upon the monarch. And after the for-
mation of a great standing army, it became necessary for the
monarch to consult the feelings and conform his acts to the
wishes of the soldiers. But there seems to have been no such
regular machinery for checking and controlling the royal au-
thority as is implied in constitutional government.

The reign of Alexander the Great has in the history of the
world much the same importance which that of his father has
in the history of Macedonia and of Greece. Alexander revo-
lutionized the East, or, at any rate, so much of it as was con-
nected with the West by intercourse or reciprocal influence.
The results of a conquest effected in ten years continued for
as many centuries, and remain in some respects to the present
day. The Hellenization of Western Asia and North-eastern
Africa, which dates from Alexander's successes, is one of the
most remarkable facts in the history of the human race, and
one of those most pregnant with important consequences. It
is as absurd to deny to the author of such a revolution the

172 RAWLINSON

possession of extraordinary genius as to suppose that the Ihad
could have been written by a man of no particular ability.

The situation of Alexander, on his accession, was extremely
critical; and it depended wholly on his own energy and force
of character whether he would retain his father's power or lose
it. His position was far from assured at home, where he had
many rivals ; and among the conquered nations there was a
general inclination to test the qualities of the new and young
prince by the assertion of independence. But Alexander was
equal to the occasion. Seizing the throne without a moment's
hesitation, he executed or drove out his rivals. Forestalling
any open hostility on the part of the Greeks, he marched hast-
ily, at the head of a large army, through Thessaly, Phocis, and
Boeotia, to Corinth, and there required, and obtained, from the
deputies whom he had convened to meet him, the same " hege-
mony," or leadership, which had been granted to his father.
Sparta alone, as she had done before, stood aloof. From Cor-
inth, Alexander retraced his steps to Macedon, and thence pro-
ceeded to chastise his enemies in the North and West, invading
Thrace, defeating the Triballi and the Getae, and even crossing
the Danube; after which he turned southward, and attacked
and defeated the Illyrians under Clitus and Glaucias.

Meanwhile, in Greece, a false report of Alexander's death
induced Thebes to raise the standard of revolt. A general in-
surrection might have followed but for the promptness and
celerity of the young monarch. Marching straight from Illyria
southward, he appeared suddenly in Boeotia, stormed and took
Thebes, and, after a wholesale massacre, punished the survivors
by completely destroying their city and selling them all as
slaves. This signal vengeance had the effect intended. All
Greece was terror-struck ; and Alexander could feel that he
might commence his Asiatic enterprise in tolerable security.
Greece was now not likely to rebel, unless he suffered some
considerable reverse.

In the spring of B.C. 334 Alexander passed the Hellespont
with an army numbering about 35,000 men. The usual re-
missness of the Persians allowed him to cross without opposi-
tion. A plan of operations, suggested by Memnon the Rhod-
ian, which consisted in avoiding an engagement in Asia Minor,

ANCIENT HISTORY

173

and carrying the war into Macedonia by means of the over-
whelming Persian fleet, was rejected, and battle was given to
Alexander, on the Granicus, by a force only a little superior
to his own. The victory of the invader placed Asia Minor
at his mercy, and Alexander with his usual celerity proceeded
to overrun it. Still, he seems to have been unwilling to remove
his army very far from the ^gean coast, so long as Memnon
was alive. But the death of that able commander, in the spring
of B.C. 333, left him free to act ; and he at once took the road
which led to the heart of the Persian empire.

The conflict at Issus between Alexander and Darius himself
was brought on under circumstances peculiarly favorable to
the Macedonian monarch. Darius had intended to fight in the
plain of Antioch, where his vast army would have had room
to act. But, as Alexander did not come to meet him, he g^rew
impatient, and advanced into the defiles which lie between
Syria and Cilicia. The armies met, almost without warning,
in a position where numbers gave no advantage. Under such
circumstances the defeat of the Persians was a matter of course.
Alexander deserves less credit for the victory of Issus than for
the use he made of it. It was a wise and farseeing policy which
disdained the simple plan of pressing forward on a defeated foe,
and preferred to let him escape and reorganize his forces, while
the victory was utilized in another way. Once possessed of the
command of the sea, Alexander would be completely secure at
home. He therefore proceeded from Issus against Tyre, Gaza,
and Egypt. Twenty months sufficed for the reduction of these
places. Having possessed himself of all the maritime provinces
of Persia, Alexander, in B.C. 331, proceeded to seek his enemy
in the heart of his empire.

In the final conflict, near Arbela, the relative strength of the
two contending parties was fairly tried. Darius had collected
the full force of his empire, had selected and prepared his
ground, and had even obtained the aid of allies. His defeat
was owing, in part, to the intrinsic superiority of the European
over the Asiatic soldier ; in part, and in great part, to the con-
summate ability of the Macedonian commander. The conflict
was absolutely decisive, for it was impossible that any battle
should be fought under conditions more favorable to Persia.

174 RAWLINSON

Accordingly, the three capitals, Babylon, Susa, and Persep-
olis, surrendered, almost without resistance; and the Persian
monarch became a fugitive, and was ere long murdered by his
servants.

The most remarkable part of Alexander's career now com-
mences. An ordinary conqueror would have been satisfied
with the submission of the great capitals, and would have
awaited, in the luxurious abodes which they offered, the adhe-
sion of the more distant provinces. But for Alexander rest
possessed no attractions. So long as there were lands or men
to conquer, it was his delight to subjugate them. The pursuit
of Darius and then of Bessus, drew him on to the north-eastern
corner of the Persian Empire, whence the way was open into
a new world, generally believed to be one of immense wealth.
From Bactria and Sogdiana, Alexander proceeded through
Afghanistan to India, which he entered on the side whence
alone India is accessible by land, viz., the north-west. At first
he warred with the princes who held their governments as
dependencies of Persia; but, when these had submitted, he
desired still to press eastward, and complete the subjugation
of the continent, which was believed to terminate at no great
distance. The refusal of his soldiers to proceed stopped him
at the Sutlej, and forced him to relinquish his designs, .and
to bend his steps homeward.

It was characteristic of Alexander, that, even when compelled
to desist from a forward movement, he did not retrace his steps,
but returned to the Persian capital by an entirely new route.
Following the course of the Indus in ships built for the purpose,
while his army marched along the banks, he conquered the
valley as he descended, and, having reached the ocean, pro-
ceeded with the bulk of his troops westward through Gedrosia
(Beloochistan) and Carmania into Persia. Meanwhile his ad-
miral, Nearchus, sailed from the Indus to the Euphrates, thus
reopening a line of communication which had probably been
little used since the time of Darius Hystaspis. Alexander, in
his march, experienced terrible difficulties ; and the losses in-
curred in the Gedrosian desert exceeded those of all the rest
of the expedition. Still he brought back to Persepolis the
greater portion of his army, and found himself in a position,

ANCIENT HISTORY 175

not only to maintain his conquests, but to undertake fresh ones,
for the purpose of rounding off and completing his empire.

It was the intention of Alexander, after taking the measures
which he thought advisable for the consolidation of his empire,
and the improvement of his intended capital, Babylon, to at-
tempt the conquest of the peninsula of Arabia — a vast tract
inconveniently interposed between his western and his eastern
provinces. A fleet, under Nearchus, was to have proceeded
along the coast, whilst Alexander, with an immense host, trav-
ersed the interior. But these plans were brought to an end
by the sudden death of their projector at Babylon, in the thir-
teenth year of his reign and the thirty-third of his age, June,
B.C. 323. This premature demise makes it impossible to de-
termine whether, or no, the political wisdom of Alexander
was on a par with his strategic ability — whether, or no, he
would have succeeded in consolidating and uniting his heter-
ogeneous conquests, and have proved the Darius as well as
the Cyrus of his empire. Cut off unexpectedly in the vigor
of early manhood, he left no inheritor, either of his power or
of his projects. The empire which he had constructed broke
into fragments soon after his death ; and his plans, whatever
they were, perished with him.

The policy of Alexander, so far as appears, aimed at com-
plete fusion and amalgamation of his own Grseco-Macedonian
subjects with the dominant race of the subjugated countries,
the Medo- Persians. He felt the difficulty of holding such ex-
tensive conquests by garrisons of Europeans, and therefore de-
termined to associate in the task of ruling and governing the
Asiatic race which had shown itself most capable of those high
functions. Ultimately, he would have fused the two peoples
into one by translations of populations and intermarriages.
Meanwhile, he united the two in the military and civil services,
incorporating 20,000 Persians into his phalanx, appointing
many Persians to satrapies, and composing his court pretty
equally of Persian and Macedonian noblemen. His scheme
had the merits of originality and intrinsic fairness. Its execu-
tion would undoubtedly have elevated Asia to a point which
she has never yet reached. But this advantage could not
have been gained without some counterbalancing loss. The

176 RAWLINSON

mixed people which it was his object to produce, while vastly
superior to ordinary Asiatics, would have fallen far below the
Hellenic, perhaps even below the Macedonian type. It is thus
not much to be regretted that the scheme was nipped in the
bud, and Hellenic culture preserved in tolerable purity to ex-
ercise a paramount influence over the Roman, and so over the
modern, world.

The death of Alexander has been ascribed by some to poi-
son, by others to habitual drunkenness. But the hardships of
the Gedrosian march and the unhealthiness of the Chaldsean
marshes sufficiently account for it.

SECOND PERIOD.

From the Death of Alexander the Great to the Battle of Ipsus,
B.C. 323 to 301.*

The circumstances under which Alexander died led natu-
rally to a period of convulsion. He left at his death no legiti-
mate issue, and designated no successor. The Macedonian
law of succession was uncertain; and, of those who had the
best title to the throne, there was not one who could be con-
sidered by any unprejudiced person worthy of it. The great
generals of the deceased king became thus, almost of necessity,
aspirants to the regal dignity ; and it was scarcely possible that
their rival claims' could be settled without an appeal to arms
and a long and bloody struggle. For a time, the fiction of a
united Macedonian Empire under the sovereignty of the old
royal family was kept up ; but from the first the generals were

* Sources. The main authority for this period is Diodorus, books
xviii. to XX. He appears to have followed, in this portion of his His-
tory, the contemporary author, Hieronymus of Cardia, who wrote an
account of Alexander and his successors, about B.C. 270. Plutarch's
lives of Eumenes, Demetrius, and Phocion are also of considerable
value; for, though he draws generally from Diodorus, yet occasionally
he has recourse to independent authorities, e.g., Duris of Samos, who
wrote a Greek and also a Macedonion History, about B.C. 280. The
thirteenth book of Justin's History and the fragments of Arrian and
Dexippus should also be consulted. For these fragments, see the
" Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum " of C. Miiller, vol. iii.

ANCIENT HISTORY 177

the real depositaries of power, and practically a division of au-
thority took effect almost from Alexander's death.*

The difficulty with respect to the succession was terminated
without bloodshed. The claims of Hercules being passed
over, Arrhidaeus, who was at Babylon, was proclaimed king
under the name of Philip, and with the understanding that he
was to share the empire with Roxana's child, if she should give
birth to a boy. At the same time, four guardians, or regents,
were appointed — Antipater and Craterus in Europe, Perdiccas
and Leonnatus (for whom was soon afterwards substituted
Meleager) in Asia. But the murder of Meleager by Perdiccas
shortly reduced the number of guardians to three.

The sole command of the great army of Asia, assumed by
Perdiccas on the death of Meleager, made his position vastly
superior to that of his European colleagues, and enabled him
to take the entire direction of affairs on his own side of the
Hellespont. But, to maintain this position, it was necessary
for him to content the other gjeat military chiefs, who had
lately been his equals, and who would not have been satisfied
to remain very much his inferiors. Accordingly, a distribu-
tion of satrapies was made within a few weeks of Alexander's
death ; and each chief of any pretensions received a province
proportioned to his merits or his influence.

It was not the intention of Perdiccas to break up the unity
of Alexander's empire. Roxana having given birth to a boy,
the government was carried on in the name of the two joint
kings. Perdiccas's own office was that of vizier or prime min-
ister. The generals who had received provinces were viewed
by Perdiccas as mere governors intrusted with their adminis-
tration, and answerable to the kings for it. He himself, as
prime minister, undertook to g^ve commands to the governors
as to their courses of action. But he soon found that they de-
clined to pay his commands any respect. The centrifugal
force was greater than the centripetal ; and the disintegjration
of the empire was not to be avoided.

It was probably the uncertainty of his actual position, and
the difficulty of improving it without some violent step, that

•Alexander left an illegitimate son named Hercules, who was ten
or twelve years old at the time of Alexander's death.

178 RAWLINSON

led Perdiccas to entertain the idea of removing the kings, and
himself seizing the empire. Though he had married Nicaea,
the daughter of Antipater, he arranged to repudiate her, and
negotiated a marriage with Cleopatra, Alexander's sister.
Such a union would have given to his claims the color of legiti-
macy. The opposition which he had chiefly to fear was that
of his colleagues in the regency, Antipater and Craterus, and
of the powerful satraps, Ptolemy Lagi and Antigonus. The
former he hoped to cajole, while he crushed the latter. But
his designs were penetrated. Antigonus fled to Macedonia,
B.C. 322, and warned Craterus and Antipater of their danger.
A league was made between them and Ptolemy ; and thus, in
the war which followed, Perdiccas and his friend Eumenes
were engaged on the one side against Antipater, Craterus, An-
tigonus, and Ptolemy Lagi on the other.

Perdiccas, leaving Eumenes to defend Asia, marched in per-
son against Ptolemy. His army was from the first disaflfected ;
and, when the military operations with which he commenced
the campaign failed, they openly mutinied, attacked him, and
slew him in his tent. Meanwhile Eumenes, remaining on the
defensive in Asia Minor, repulsed the assaults made upon him,
defeated and slew Craterus, and made himself a great reputa-
tion.

The removal of Perdiccas from the scene necessitated a new
arrangement. Ptolemy declining the regency, it was con-
ferred by the army of Perdiccas on Pithon and Arrhidseus,
two of their generals, who with difficulty maintained their posi-
tion against the intrigues of Eurydice, the young wife of the
mock monarch, Philip Arrhidseus, until the arrival of Anti-
pater in Syria, to whom they resigned their office. Antipater
now became sole regent, silenced Eurydice, and made a fresh
division of the provinces at Triparadisus, in Northern Syria,
B.C. 320.

A war followed between Antigonus and Eumenes. De-
feated in the open field through the treachery of Apollonides,
whom Antigonus had bribed, Eumenes took refuge in the
mountain fastness of Nora, where he defended himself success-
fully against every attack for many months. Antigonus
turned his arms against other so-called rebels, defeated them,

ANCIENT HISTORY 179

and became master of the greater part of Asia Minor. Mean-
while, Ptolemy picked a quarrel with Laomedon, satrap of
Syria, sent an army into his province, and annexed it.

The death of the regent Antipater in Macedonia produced a
further complication. Overlooking the claims of his son, Cas-
sander, he bequeathed the regency to his friend, the aged Po-
lysperchon, and thus drove Cassander into opposition. Cas-
sander fled to Antigonus ; and a league was formed between
Ptolemy, Cassander, and Antigonus on the one hand, and Po-
lysperchon and Eumenes on the other ; the two latter defend-
ing the cause of unity and of the Macedonian monarchs, the
three former that of disruption and of satrapial independence.

Antigonus began the war by absorbing Lydia and attacking
Mysia. He was soon, however, called away to the East by the
threatening attitude of Eumenes, who had collected a force in
Cilicia, with which he menaced Syria and Phoenicia. The
command of the sea, which Phoenicia might have given, would
have enabled Eumenes and Polysperchon to unite their forces
and act together. It was the policy of Antigonus to prevent
this. Accordingly, after defeating the royal fleet, commanded
by Clitus, near Byzantium, he marched in person against Eu-
menes, who retreated before him, crossed the Euphrates and
Tigris, and united his troops with those of a number of the
Eastern satraps, whom he found leagued together to resist the
aggressions of Seleucus and Pithon. Antigonus advanced to
Susa, while Eumenes retreated into Persia Proper. Two bat-
tles were fought with little advantage to either side ; but at last
the Macedonian jealousy of a foreigner and the insubordina-
tion of Alexander's veterans prevailed. Eumenes was seized
by his own troops, delivered up to Antigonus, and put to death,
B.C. 316.

Meanwhile, in Europe, Cassander had proved fully capable
of making head against Polysperchon. After counteracting
the effect of Polysperchon's proceedings in Attica and the Pel-
oponnese, he had marched into Macedonia, where impor-
tant changes had taken place among the members of the royal
family. Eurydice, the young wife of Philip Arrhidaeus, had
raised a party, and so alarmed Polysperchon for his own power
that he had determined on making common cause with Olym-

i8o RAWLINSON

pias, who returned from Epirus to Macedon on his invitation.
Eurydice found herself powerless in the presence of the more
august princess, and, betaking herself to flight, was arrested,
and, together with her husband, put to death by her rival, B.C.
317. But Cassander avenged her the next year. Entering
Macedonia suddenly, he carried all before him, besieged Olym-
pias in Pydna, and, though she surrendered on terms, allowed
her to be killed by her enemies. Roxana and the young Alex-
ander he held as prisoners, while he strengthened his title to the
Macedonian throne by a marriage with Thessalonica, the
daughter of King Philip.

Thus the rebellious satraps had everywhere triumphed over
the royalists, and the Macedonian throne had fallen, though
Roxana and the young Alexander were still living. But now
the victors fell out among themselves. Antigonus, after the
death of Eumenes, had begun to let it be seen that nothing less
than the entire empire of Alexander would content him. He
slew Pithon, drove Seleucus from Babylonia, and distributed
the Eastern provinces to his creatures. He then marched
westward, where important changes had occurred during his
absence. Cassander had made himself complete master of
Macedonia and Greece ; Lysimachus had firmly established
himself in Thrace ; and Asander, satrap of Caria, had extended
his dominion over Lycia and Cappadocia. These chiefs, fear-
ing the ambition of Antigonus, entered into a league with
Ptolemy Lagi and Seleucus, now a fugitive at his court ; and
when the terms which they proposed were rejected, made prep-
arations for war.

The war of Antigonus against Ptolemy, Cassander, Seleu-
cus, Asander (or the Carian Cassander), and Lysimachus lasted
for three years. Antigonus had the assistance of his son De-
metrius in Asia, and (at first) of Polysperchon and his son
Alexander in Europe. He was, on the whole, moderately suc-
cessful in Syria, Asia Minor, and Greece ; but the recovery of
Babylonia by Seleucus, and the general adhesion to his cause
of the Eastern provinces, more than counterbalanced these
gains.

The terms of the peace negotiated in B.C. 311 were, that
each should keep what he possessed; that the Greek cities

ANCIENT HISTORY i8i

should be independent ; that Cassander should retain his power
till the young Alexander came of age. Seleucus was no party
to the treaty, and was not mentioned in it. It was probably
thought that he could well hold his own ; though had he been
seriously menaced, the treaty would have been at once thrown
to the winds. As it was, only a few months passed before there
was a renewal of hostilities.

The murder of Roxana and the young Alexander by the
orders of Cassander was a natural consequence of the third arti-
cle of the treaty, and was no doubt expected by Antigonus.
He gladly saw these royal personages removed out of his way ;
while it suited him that the odium of the act should attach to
one of his adversaries.

Hostilities recommenced in the year following the treaty,
B.C. 310. They were precipitated by the breach which took
place between Antigonus and his nephew Ptolemy, who had
been employed by him against Cassander in Greece. Ptolemy
Lagi was the first to take up arms. Complaining that An-
tigonus had not withdrawn his garrisons from the Greek cities
of Asia Minor, he undertook to liberate them. Antigonus, on
his side, complained that Cassander did not withdraw his gar-
risons from the cities of European Greece. Thus the war was
renewed, nominally for the freedom of Greece. In reality, the
contest was for supremacy on the part of Antigonus, for inde-
pendence on that of the satraps ; and the only question with
respect to Greece was, who should be her master.

The conquerors at Ipsus, Seleucus and Lysimachus, divided
the dominions of Alexander afresh. As was natural, they took
to themselves the lion's share. The greater part of Asia Minor
was made over to Lysimachus. Seleucus received Cappa-
docia, part of Phrygia, Upper Syria, Mesopotamia, and the val-
ley of the Euphrates. Cilicia was given to Cassander's
brother, Pleistarchus. Neither Cassander himself nor Ptol-
emy received any additions to their dominions.

War had now raged over most of the countries conquered by
Alexander for the space of twenty years. The loss of lives and
the consumption of treasure had been immense. Greece, Asia
Minor, Cyprus, and Syria, which had been the chief scenes of
conflict, must have suffered especially. Nowhere had there

i8z RAWLINSON

been much attempt at organization or internal improvements,
the attention of the rulers having been continually fixed on
military affairs. Still, the evils of constant warfare had been,
out of Greece at any rate, partly counterbalanced by the foun-
dation of large and magnificent cities, intended partly as indi-
cations of the wealth and greatness of their founders, partly
as memorials to hand down their names to after ages ; by the
habits of military discipline imparted to a certain number
of the Asiatics ; and by the spread of the Greek language and
of Greek ideas over most of Western Asia and North-eastern
Africa. The many dialects of Asia Minor died away and com-
pletely disappeared before the tongue of the conqueror ; which,
even where it did not wholly oust the vernacular (as in Egypt,
in Syria, and in Upper Asia), stood beside it and above it as
the language of the ruling classes and of the educated, gener-
ally intelligible to such persons from the shores of the Adriatic
to the banks of the Indus, and from the Crimea to Elephantine.
Knowledge rapidly progressed ; for not only did the native
histories of Egypt, Babylon, Phoenicia, Judaea, and other East-
ern countries become now for the first time really known to
the Greeks, but the philosophic thought and the accumulated
scientific stores of the most advanced Oriental nations were
thrown open to them, and Greek intelligence was able to em-
ploy itself on materials of considerable value, which had hith-
erto been quite inaccessible. A great advance was made in
the sciences of mathematics, astronomy, geography, ethnology,
and natural history, partly through this opening up of Oriental
stores, partly through the enlarged acquaintance with the
world and its phenomena which followed on the occupation by
the Greeks of vast tracts previously untrodden by Europeans.
Commerce, too, in spite of the unsettled state of the newly-oc-
cupied countries, extended its operations. On the other hand,
upon Greece itself familiarity with Asiatic ideas and modes of
life produced a debasing effect. The Oriental habits of ser-
vility and adulation superseded the old free-spoken indepen-
dence and manliness ; patriotism and public spirit disappeared ;
luxury increased; literature lost its vigor; art deteriorated;
and the people sank into a nation of pedants, parasites, and
adventurers.

ANCIENT HISTORY 183

THIRD PERIOD.

History of the States into which the Macedonian Monarchy
was broken up after the Battle of Ipsus.

Part I.
History of the Syrian Kingdom of the Seleucida^ B.C. 312 to dj.*

The kingdom of the Seleucidae was originally established in
Inner Asia. It dates from the year B.C. 312, when its founder,
Seleucus Nicator, or " the Conqueror," taking advantage of
the check which Antigonus had received by the victory of
Ptolemy Lagi over Demetrius, near Gaza, returned to the prov-
ince from which he had been a few years earlier expelled by his
g^eat adversary, and, re-establishing himself without much dif-
ficulty, assumed the diadem. At first, the kingdom consisted
merely of Babylonia and the adjacent regions, Susiana, Media,
and Persia; but, after the unsuccessful expedition of Deme-
trius (B.C. 311), the Oriental provinces generally submitted
themselves, and within six years from the date of his return
to Babylon, Seleucus was master of all the countries lying
between the Indus and Euphrates on the one hand, the Jax-
artes and the Indian Ocean on the other.

Shortly afterwards he undertook a great campaign against
Sandracottus (Chandragnpta), an Indian monarch, who bore
sway in the region about the western head streams of the Gan-
ges. After a brief struggle, he concluded a peace with this
powerful prince, who furnished him with 500 elephants, and
threw India open to his traders. It is probable that he pur-

* Sources. The original authorities for the history of Syria during
this period are two books (xix., xx.), and the fragments of several lost
books, of Diodorus (lib. xxi.-xxxiv.). the epitome of Justin, some books
and fragments of Polybius (especially books v., vii., and viii.). the
" Syriaca " of Appian, Livy (books xxxi. to xlv.), the " Books of Mac-
cabees," and the " Antiquities " of Josephus. None of these works con-
tain a continuous or complete account of the whole period; and the
history has to be constructed by piecing together the different narra-
tives. The chronology of the later kings depends mainly upon the
dates which appear on their coins.

i84 RAWLINSON

chased the good-will of Sandracottus by ceding to him a por-
tion of his own Indian possessions.

In the year B.C. 302 Seleucus, whose aid had been invoked
by Lysimachus and Cassander, set out from Babylon for Asia
Minor, and, having wintered in Cappadocia, effected a junction
with the forces of Lysimachus early in the spring of B.C. 301.
The battle of Ipsus followed. Antigonus was defeated and
slain, and his dominions shared by his conquerors. To the
kingdom of Seleucus were added Cappadocia, part of Phrygia,
Upper Syria, and the right bank of the middle Euphrates.

By this arrangement the territorial increase which the king-
dom received was not large; but the change in the seat of
empire, which the accession of territory brought about, was
extremely important. By shifting his capital from Babylonia
to Syria, from the Lower Tigris to the Orontes, Seleucus
thought to strengthen himself against his rivals, Lysimachus
and Ptolemy. He forgot, apparently, that by placing his cap-
ital at one extremity of his long kingdom he weakened it gen-
erally, and, in particular, loosened his grasp upon the more
eastern provinces, which were the least Hellenized and the
most liable to revolt. Had Babylon or Seleucia continued the
seat of government, the East might probably have been re-
tained ; the kingdom of the Parthians might never have grown
up. Rome, when she interfered in the affairs of Asia, would
have found a great Greek Empire situated beyond the Eu-
phrates, and so almost inaccessible to her arms ; the two civil-
izations would have co-existed, instead of being superseded
the one by the other, and the history of Asia and of the world
would have been widely different.

The followers of Alexander inherited from their master a
peculiar fondness for the building of new cities, which they
called after themselves, their fathers, or their favorite wives.
Cassander built Thessalonica on the bay of the name, and
Cassandreia in the peninsula of Pallene. Lysimachus fixed
his seat of government at a new town, which he called Lysi-
macheia, on the neck of the Chersonese. Antigonus was build-
ing Antigoneia, on the Orontes, when he fell at Ipsus. His
son, Demetrius, made his capital Demetrias, on the gulf of
Pagasae. Seleucus, even before he transferred the seat of gov-

ANCIENT HISTORY 185

emment to Antioch, had removed it from Babylon to his city
of Seleucia, on the Tigris. Ptolemy alone maintained the cap-
ital which he found established on his arrival in Egypt. The
numerous Antiochs, Laodiceias, Epiphaneias, and Seleuceias,
with which Asia became covered, attest the continuance of the
taste in the successors of Nicator.

Though Seleucus had come to the rescue, on the invitation
of Ptolemy, Cassander, and Lysimachus, yet he was well aware
that he could place no dependence on the continuance of their
amity. His success made them jealous of him, and induced
them to draw nearer to each other, and unite their interests by
intermarriages. Seleucus, therefore, cast about for an ally,
and found one in Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, his late
adversary, whom he attached to himself in the same way.
Demetrius, who had escaped from Ipsus with a considerable
force, was a personage of importance; and, by supporting
him in his quarrels with Cassander, and then Lysimachus,
Seleucus was able to keep those princes employed.

In Asia a period of tranquillity followed the marriage of Se-
leucus. Cassander and Lysimachus were occupied with wars
in Europe raised by the ambition of Demetrius. Ptolemy by
himself was too weak to effect any thing, and, having been al-
lowed to retain Lower Syria and Palestine, had no ground of
complaint. Seleucus employed the interval (about twelve
years, B.C. 299 to 287) in building his capital, Antioch ; en-
larging and beautifying its port, Seleuceia ; and consolidating,
arranging, and organizing his vast empire. The whole terri-
tory was divided into seventy-two satrapies, which were placed
under the government of Greeks or Macedonians, not of na-
tives. A large standing army was maintained, composed main-
ly of native troops, officered by Macedonians or Greeks. After
a while, Seleucus divided his empire with his son Antiochus,
committing to him the entire government of all the provinces
beyond the Euphrates — a dangerous precedent, though one
which can scarcely be said to have had actual evil consequences.
At the same time. Seleucus yielded to Antiochus the possession
of his consort, Stratonice, with whom that prince had fallen
desperately in love.

The first disturbance of the tranquillity was caused by the

l86 RAWLINSON

wild projects of Demetrius. That hare-brained prince, after
gaining and then losing Macedonia, plunged suddenly into
Asia, where he hoped to win by his sword a new dominion.
Unable to make any serious impression on the kingdom of
Lysimachus, he entered Cilicia and became engaged in hos-
tilities with Seleucus, who defeated him, took him prisoner,
and kept him in a private condition for the rest of his life.

Shortly afterwards, B.C. 281, occurred the rupture between
Seleucus and Lysimachus, which led to the death of that aged
monarch and the conquest of great part of his dominions.
Domestic troubles, caused by Arsinoe, paved the way for the
attack of Seleucus, who found his best support in the disafifec-
tion of his enemy's subjects. The battle of Corupedion cost
Lysimachus his life ; and gave the whole of Asia Minor into
the hands of the Syrian king. It might have been expected
that the European provinces would have been gained with
equal ease, and that, with the exception of Egypt, the scat-
tered fragments of Alexander's empire would have been once
more reunited. But an avenger of Lysimachus appeared in
the person of the Egyptian exile, Ptolemy Ceraunus, the eldest
son of Ptolemy Lagi ; and as Seleucus was proceeding to take
possession of Lysimacheia, his late rival's capital, he was mur-
dered in open day by the Egyptian adventurer, who thereupon
became king of Macedon.

Antiochus L (Soter) succeeded to his father's dominions,
B.C. 280, and shortly became engaged in hostilities with Zi-
poetes and Nicomedes, native kings of Bithynia, the former
of whom had successfully maintained his independence against
Lysimachus. Nicomedes (B.C. 278), finding his own resources
insufficient for the struggle, availed himself of the assistance
of the Gauls, who had been now for some years ravaging East-
ern Europe, and had already aided him against his brother
Zipoetes. With their help he maintained his independence, and
crippled the power of Antiochus, who lost Northern Phrygia,
which was occupied by the Gauls and became Galatia, and
North-western Lydia, which became the kingdom of Perga-
mus. Antiochus succeeded in inflicting one considerable defeat
on the Gauls, B.C. 275, whence his cognomen of " Soter "
(Saviour); otherwise his expeditions were unfortunate; and

ANCIENT HISTORY 187

the Syrian empire at his death had declined considerably below
the point of greatness and splendor reached under Nicator.

Antiochus II. sumamed 6eo9, " the God," succeeded his
father. He was a weak and eflfeminate prince, sunk in sensual-
ity and profligacy, who allowed the kingdom to be ruled by
his wives and male favorites. Under him the decline of the
empire became rapid. The weakness of his government tempt-
ed the provinces to rebel ; and the Parthian and Bactrian king-
doms date from his reign. The only success which attended
him was in his war with Egypt, at the close of which he recov-
ered what he had previously lost to Philadelphus in Asia Minor.

Seleucus II., sumamed Callinicus, became king on the as-
sassination of his father. Throughout his reign, which lasted
rather more than twenty years, B.C. 246 to 226, he was most
unfortunate, being engaged in wars with Ptolemy Euergetes,
with Antiochus Hierax, his own brother, and with the Parthian
king, Arsaces II., in all of which he met with disasters. Still,
it is remarkable that, even when his fortunes were at the lowest
ebb, he always found a means of recovering himself, so that
his epithet of Callinicus, " the Victorious," was not wholly in-
appropriate. The kingdom must have been greatly weakened
and exhausted during his reign ; but its limits were not seri-
ously contracted. Portions of Asia Minor were indeed lost
to Ptolemy and to Attains, and the Parthians appear to have
made themselves masters of Hyrcania ; but, excepting in these
two quarters, Seleucus recovered his losses, and left the terri-
tories which he had inherited to his son, Seleucus Ceraunus.

Seleucus III. — sumamed Ceraunus, " the Thunderbolt " —
had a reign which lasted only three years. Assisted by his
cousin, the young Achseus, he prepared a great expedition
against the Perganiene monarch. Attains, whose dominions
now reached to the Taurus. His ill-paid army, however, while
on the march, became mutinous ; and he was assassinated by
some of his officers, B.C. 223.

On the death of Seleucus III., Antiochus III., sumamed
" the Great," ascended the throne. His long reign, which ex-
ceeded thirty-six years, constitutes the most eventful period
of Syrian history. Antiochus did much to recover, consolidate,
and in some quarters enlarge, his empire. He put down the

i88 RAWLINSON

important rebellions of Molo and Achaeus, checked the prog-
ress of the Parthians and Bactrians, restored his frontier to-
wards India, drove the Egyptians from Asia, and even at one
time established his dominion over a portion of Europe. But
these successes were more than counterbalanced by the losses
which he sustained in his war with the Romans, whom he need-
lessly drew into Asia. The alliance between Rome and Perga-
mus, and the consequent aggrandizement of that kingdom,
were deeply injurious to Syria, and greatly accelerated her de-
cline. Antiochus was unwise to provoke the hostility of the
Romans, and foolish, when he had provoked it, not to take
the advice of Hannibal as to the mode in which the war should
be conducted. Had he united with Macedonia and Carthage,
and transferred the contest into Italy, the Roman power might
have been broken or checked. By standing alone, and on the
defensive, he at once made his defeat certain, and rendered its
consequences more injurious than they would have been other-
wise.

Antiochus was succeeded by his son, Seleucus IV., who took
the name of Philopator, and reigned eleven years, B.C. 187 to
176. This period was wholly uneventful. The fear of Rome,
and the weakness produced by exhaustion, forced Seleucus to
remain quiet, even when Eumenes of Pergamus seemed about
to conquer and absorb Pontus. Rome held as a hostage for
his fidelity, first, his brother, Antiochus, and then his son,
Demetrius. Seleucus was murdered by Heliodorus, his treas-
urer (B.C. 176), who hoped to succeed to his dominions.

On the death of Seleucus, the throne was seized by Helio-
dorus ; but it was not long before Antiochus, the brother of the
late king, with the help of the Pergamene monarch, Eumenes,
recovered it. This prince, who is known in history as Antio-
chus IV., or (more commonly) as Antiochus Epiphanes, was
a man of courage and energy. He engaged in important wars
with Armenia and Egypt; and would beyond a doubt have
conquered the latter country, had it not been for the interposi-
tion of the Romans. Still, the energy of Epiphanes was of
little benefit to his country. He gained no permanent advan-
tage from his Egyptian campaigns, since the Romans deprived
him even of Cyprus. He made no serious impression on Ar-

ANCIENT HISTORY 189

menia, though he captured Artaxias, its sovereign. On the
other hand, his religious intolerance raised him up an enemy
in the heart of his empire, whose bitter hostility proved under
his successors a prolific source of weakness. The Jews, favored
by former kings of Syria, were driven to desperation by the
mad project of this self-willed monarch, who, not content with
plundering the Temple to satisfy his necessities, profaned it
by setting up in the Holy of Holies the image of Jupiter
Olympius. His luxury and extravagance also tended to ruin
his empire, and made him seek to enrich himself with the plun-
der of other temples besides that at Jerusalem. An attempt
of this kind, which was baffled, in Elymais, is said to have been
followed by an access of superstitious terror, which led to his
death at Tabae, B.C. 164.

Epiphanes was succeeded by Antiochus V., surnamed Eu-
pator, a boy not more than twelve years old. The chief power
during his reig^ was in the hands of Lysias, whom Epiphanes
had left as regent when he quitted Antioch. Lysias attempts
to reduce the rebel Jews, but allows himself to be diverted from
the war by the attitude of his rival Philip, whom he attacks,
defeats, and puts to death. He takes no steps, however, to
resist the Parthians when they overrun the Elastern provinces,
or the Romans when they harshly enforce the terms of the
treaty concluded after the battle of Magnesia. The position
of affairs, which we can well understand the Romans favoring,
was most injurious to the power of Syria, which, in the hands
of a minor and a regent, was equally incapable of maintaining
internal order and repelling foreign attack. It was an advan-
tage to Syria when Demetrius, the adult son of Seleucus Philo-
pator, escaped from Rome, where he had been long detained
as a hostage, and, putting Lysias and Eupator to death, him-
self mounted the throne.

Demetrius, having succeeded in obtaining the sanction of
Rome to his usurpation, occupied himself for some years in
attempts to reduce the Jews. He appears to have been a vig-
orous administrator, and a man of considerable ambition and
energy ; but he could not arrest the decline of the Syrian state.
The Romans compelled him to desist from his attacks on the
Jews; and when he ventured on an expedition into Cappa-

19© RAWLINSON

docia, for the purpose of expelling the king Ariarathes, and
giving the crown to Orophernes, his bastard brother, a league
was formed against him by the neighboring kings, to which
the Romans became parties ; and a pretender, Alexander Balas,
an illegitimate son of Epiphanes, was encouraged to come for-
ward and claim the throne. So low had the Syrian power now
sunk, that both Demetrius and his rival courted the favor of
the despised Jews; and their adhesion to' the cause of the pre-
tender probably turned the scale in his favor. After two years
of warfare and two important battles, Demetrius was defeated,
and lost both his crown and life.

Alexander Balas, who had been supported in his struggle
with Demetrius by the kings of Pergamus and Egypt, was
given by the latter the hand of Cleopatra, his daughter. But
he soon proved himself unfit to rule. Committing the man-
agement of affairs to an unworthy favorite, Ammonius, he gave
himself up to every kind of self-indulgence. Upon this, Deme-
trius, the eldest son of the late king, perceiving that Balas had
become odious to his subjects, took heart, and, landing in Cili-
cia, commenced a struggle for the throne. The fidelity of the
Jews protected Alexander for a while; but when his father-
in-law, Ptolemy Philometor, passed over to the side of his an-
tagonist, the contest was decided against him. Defeated in
a pitched battle near Antioch, he fled to Abas in Arabia, where
he was assassinated by his own officers, who sent his head to
Ptolemy.

Demetrius II., surnamed Nicator, then ascended the throne.
He had already, while pretender, married Cleopatra, the wife
of his rival, whom Ptolemy had forced Balas to give up. On
obtaining full possession of the kingdom, he ruled tyrannically,
and disgusted many of his subjects. The people of Antioch
having risen in revolt, and Demetrius having allowed his Jew-
ish body-guard to plunder the town, Diodotus of Apamea set
up a rival king in the person of Antiochus VI., son of Alexan-
der Balas, a child of two years of age, who bore the regal title
for three or four years (B.C. 146 to 143), after which Diodotus
removed him, and, taking the name of Trypho, declared him-
self independent monarch {avroKpdTwp). After vain efforts to
reduce his rivals for the space of about seven years, Demetrius,

ANaENT HISTORY

«f«

leaving his wife, Qeopatra, to maintain his interests in Syria,
marched into his Eastern provinces, which were in danger of
falHng a prey to the Parthians. Here, though at first he gained
such advantages as enabled him to assume the title of " Con-
queror " (viKciTtop), his arms soon met with a reverse. Defeated
by the Parthian monarch, Arsaces VI., in the year B.C. 140,
he was taken prisoner, and remained a captive at the Parthian
court for several years.

During the absence of Demetrius in the remote East, his
wife, Cleopatra, unable to make head against Tryphon, looked
out for some effectual support, and found it in Antiochus of
Sida (Sidetes), her husband's brother, who, joining his arms
with hers, attacked Tryphon, and after a struggle, which seems
to have lasted nearly two years, defeated him and put him to
death. Antiochus Sidetes upon this became sole monarch of
Syria, B.C. 137, and contracted a marriage with Cleopatra, his
captive brother's wife, who considered herself practically di-
vorced by her husband's captivity and marriage with a Par-
thian princess. His first step, after establishing his authority,
was to reduce the Jews, B.C. 135 to 133. A few years later,
B.C. 129, he undertook an expedition into Parthia for the pur-
pose of delivering his brother, and gained some important suc-
cesses ; but was finally defeated by the Parthian monarch, who
attacked his army in its winter-quarters, and destroyed it with
its commander.

Meanwhile Demetrius II., having been released from cap-
tivity by the Parthian monarch, who hoped by exciting
troubles in Syria to force Antiochus to retreat, had reached
Antioch and recovered his former kingdom. But he was not
suflFered to remain long in tranquillity. Ptolemy Physcon, the
king of Eg>'pt, raised up a pretender to his crown in the person
of Alexander Zabinas, who professed to be the son of Balas.
A battle was fought between the rivals near Damascus, in
which Demetrius was completely defeated. Forced to take
flight, he sought a refuge with his wife at Ptolemais, but was
rejected ; whereupon he endeavored to throw himself into Tyre,
but was captured and slain, B.C. 126.

War followed between Zabinas and Cleopatra, who, having
put to death Seleucus, her eldest son, because he had assumed

192 RAWLINSON

the diadem without her permission, associated with herself on
the throne her second son, Antiochus, and reigned conjointly
with him till B.C. 121. Zabinas maintained himself in parts of
Syria for seven years ; but, having quarrelled with his patron,
Ptolemy Physcon, he was reduced to straits, about B.C. 124,
and two years afterwards was completely crushed by Anti-
ochus, who forced him to swallow poison, B.C. 122. Soon
afterwards — B.C. 121 — Antiochus found himself under the ne-
cessity of putting his mother to death in order to secure his
own life, against which he discovered her to be plotting.

Syria now enjoyed a period of tranquillity under Antiochus
VIII., for the space of eight years, B.C. 122 to 1 14. The East-
ern provinces were, however, completely lost, and no attempt
was made to recover them. The Syrian kingdom was con-
fined within Taurus on the north, the Euphrates on the east,
and Palestine on the south. Judsea had become wholly inde-
pendent. The great empire, which had once reached from
Phrygia to the Indus, had shrunk to the dimensions of a prov-
ince; and there was no spirit in either prince or people to
make any effort to regain what had been lost. The country
was exhausted by the constant wars, the pillage of the soldiers,
and the rapacity of the monarchs. Wealth was accumulated
in a few hands. The people of the capital were wholly given
up to luxury. If Rome had chosen to step in at any time after
the death of the second Demetrius, she might have become
mistress of the whole of Syria almost without a struggle. At
first her domestic troubles, and then her contest with Mith-
ridates, hindered her, so that it was not till half a century later
that the miseries of Syria were ended by her absorption into
the Roman Empire.

The tranquillity of Antiochus VIII. was disturbed in B.C.
114 by the revolt of his half-brother, Antiochus Cyzicenus, the
son of Cleopatra by Antiochus Sidetes, her third husband. A
bloody contest followed, which it was attempted to terminate
at the close of three years, B.C. 1 11, by a partition of the terri-
tory. But the feud soon broke out afresh. War raged be-
tween the brothers for nine years, B.C. 105 to 96, with varied
success, but with no decided advantage to either, while the dis-
integration of the empire rapidly proceeded. The towns on

ANCIENT HISTORY

>93

the coast, Tyre, Sidon, Seleuceia, assumed independence. Ci-
licia revolted. The Arabs ravaged Syria on the one hand, and
the Egyptians on the other. At length, amid these various
calamities, the reign of Antiochus VIII. came to an end by his
assassination, in B.C. 96, by Heracleon, an officer of his court.

Heracleon endeavored to seize the crown, but failed. It fell
to Seleucus V. (Epiphanes), the eldest son of Grypus, who con-
tinued the war with Antiochus Cyzicenus, and brought it to a
successful issue in the second year of his reign, B.C. 95, when
Cyzicenus, defeated in a great battle, slew himself to prevent
his capture. But the struggle between the two houses was not
yet ended. Antiochus Eusebes, the son of Cyzicenus, as-
sumed the royal title, and attacking Seleucus drove him out of
Syria into Cilicia, where he perished miserably, being burnt
alive by the people of Mopsuestia, from whom he had required
a contribution.

Philip, the second son of Antiochus Grypus, succeeded, and
carried on the war with Eusebes for some years, in conjunction
with his brothers, Demetrius, and Antiochus Dionysus, until at
last Eusebes was overcome and forced to take refuge in Par-
thia. Philip and his brothers then fell out, and engaged in war
one against another. At length the Syrians, seeing no end to
these civil contests, called to their aid the king of the neigh-
boring Armenia, Tigranes, and putting themselves under his
rule, obtained a respite from suffering for about fourteen years,
B.C. 83 to 69. At the close of this period, Tigranes, having
mixed himself up in the Mithridatic war, was defeated by the
Romans, and forced to relinquish Syria.

The Syrian throne seems then to have fallen to Antiochus
Asiaticus, the son of Eusebes, who held it for four years only,
when he was dispossessed by Pompey, and the remnant of the
kingdom of the Seleucidae was reduced into the form of a Ro-
man province, B.C. 65.
13

194

RAWLINSON

Part II.
History of the Egyptian Kingdom of the Ptolemies, B. C. 32 j to jo.^

The kingdom of the Ptolemies, which owed its origin to
Alexander the Great, rose to a pitch of greatness and prosper-
ity which, it is probable, was never dreamt of by the Conqueror.
His subjection of Egypt was accomplished rapidly; and he
spent but little time in the organization of his conquest. Still,
the foundation of all Egypt's later greatness was laid, and the
character of its second civilization determined, by him, in the
act by which he transferred the seat of government from the
inland position of Memphis to the maritime Alexandria. By
this alteration not only was the continued pre-eminence of the
Macedo-Greek element secured, but the character of the Egyp-
tians themselves was modified. Commercial pursuits were
adopted by a large part of the nation. Intercourse with for-
eigners, hitherto checked and discouraged, became common.
Production was stimulated ; enterprise throve ; and the stereo-
typed habits of this most rigid of ancient peoples were to a
large extent broken into. In language and religion they still
continued separate from their conquerors ; but their manners
and tone of thought underwent a change. The stiflf-necked
rebels against the authority of the Persian crown became the
willing subjects of the Macedonians. Absorbed in the pur-
suits of industry, or in the novel employment of literature, the
Egyptians forgot their old love of independence, and content-
edly acquiesced in the new regime.

* Sources. The sources for the Egyptian history of this period are for
the most part identical with those which have been mentioned at the
head of the last section as sources for the history of the Seleucidae; but
on the whole they are scantier and less satisfactory. As the contact
between Judaea and Egypt during this period was only occasional, the
information furnished by Josephus and the " Books of Maccabees " is
discontinuous and fragmentary. Again, there is no work on Egypt
corresponding to the " Syriaca " of Appian. The chronology, more-
over, is in confusion, owing to the fact that the Ptolemies adopted no
era, only dating their coins in some instances by their regnal years;
so that the exactness which an era furnishes is wanting. Some im-
portant details with respect to foreign conquests and to the internal
administration are, however, preserved to us in Inscriptions.

ANCIENT HISTORY 195

In the history of nations much depends on the characters of
individuals ; and Egypt seems to have been very largely in-
debted to the first Ptolemy for her extraordinary prosperity.
Assigned the African provinces in the division of Alexander's
dominions after his death (B.C. 323), he proceeded at once to
his government, and, resigning any great ambition, sought to
render his own territory unassailable, and to make such addi-
tions to it as could be attempted without much risk. It was
among his special aims to make Egypt a great naval power;
and in this he succeeded almost beyond his hopes, having after
many vicissitudes established his authority over Palestine,
Phoenicia, and Coele-Syria ; and also possessed himself of the
island of Cyprus. Cilicia, Caria, and Pamphylia were open to
his attacks, and sometimes subject to his sway. For a time he
even held important positions in Greece, e.g., Corinth and
Sicyon ; but he never allowed the maintenance of these distant
acquisitions to entangle him inextricably in foreign wars, or to
endanger his home dominions. Attacked twice in his own
province, once by Perdiccas (B.C. 321), and once by Demetrius
and Antigonus (B.C. 306),. he both times repulsed his assail-
ants and maintained his own territory intact. Readily retiring
if danger threatened, he was always prompt to advance when
occasion offered. His combined prudence and vigor obtained
the reward of ultimate success ; and his death left Eg^pt in pos-
session of all the more important of his conquests.

In one quarter alone did Ptolemy endeavor to extend his
African dominion. The flourishing country of the Cyrenaica,
which lay not far from Egypt upon the west, had welcomed
Alexander as a deliverer from the power of Persia, and had
been accepted by him into alliance. Ptolemy, who coveted its
natural wealth, and disliked the existence of an independent
republic in his neighborhood, found an occasion in the troubles
which at this time fell upon Cyrene, to establish his authority
over the whole region. At the same time he must have
brought under subjection the Libyan tribes of the district be-
tween Egypt and the Cyrenaica, who in former times had been
dependent upon the native Egyptian monarchy, and had sub-
mitted to the Persians when Egj'pt was conquered by Cam-
byses.

196 RAWLINSON

The system of government established by Ptolemy Lagi, so
far as it can be made out, was the following. The monarch
was supreme, and indeed absolute, having the sole direction of
affairs and the sole appointment of all officers. The changes,
however, made in the internal administration were few. The
division of the whole country into nomes was maintained ; and
most of the old nomes were kept, a certain number only being
subdivided. Each was ruled by its nomarch, who received his
appointment from the crown, and might at any time be super-
seded. The nomarchs were frequently, perhaps even gener-
ally, native Egyptians. They administered in their provinces
the old Egyptian laws, and maintained the old Egyptian re-
ligion. It was from first to last a part of the established policy
of the Lagid monarchs to protect and honor the religion of
their subjects, which they regarded as closely akin to their own,
and of which they ostentatiously made themselves the patrons.
Ptolemy Lagi began the practice of rebuilding and ornament-
ing the temples of the Egyptian gods, and paid particular
honor to the supposed incarnations of Apis. The old priv-
ileges of the priests, and especially their exemption from land-
tax, were continued ; and they were allowed everywhere the
utmost freedom in the exercise of every rite of their religion.
In return for these favors the priests were expected to acknowl-
edge a quasi-divinity in the Lagid monarchs, and to perform
certain ceremonies in their honor, both in their lifetime and
after their decease.

At the same time many exclusive privileges were reserved
for the conquering race. The tranquillity of the country was
maintained by a standing army composed almost exclusively
of Greeks and Macedonians, and officered wholly by members
of the dominant class. This army was located in, compar-
atively, a few spots, so that its presence was not much felt by
the great bulk of the population. As positions of authority in
the military service were reserved for Graeco-Macedonians, so
also in the civil service of the country all offices of any im-
portance were filled up from the same class. This class, more-
over, which was found chiefly in a small number of the chief
towns, enjoyed full municipal liberty in these places, electing
its own officers, and, for the most part, administering its own

ANCIENT HISTORY 197

affairs without interference on the part of the central govern-
ment.

One of the chief peculiarities of the early Lagid kingdom —
a peculiarity for which it was indebted to its founder — was its
encouragement of literature and science. Ptolemy Lagi was
himself an author ; and, alone among the successors of Alex-
ander, inherited the regard for men of learning and research
which had distinguished his great patron. Following the ex-
ample of Aristotle, he set himself to collect an extensive library,
and lodged it in a building connected with the royal palace.
Men of learning were invited by him to take up their residence
at Alexandria ; and the " Museum " was founded, a College of
Professors, which rapidly drew to it a vast body of students,
and rendered Alexandria the university of the Eastern world.
It was too late in the history of the Greek race to obtain, by the
fostering influence of judicious patronage, the creation of mas-
terpieces ; but exact science, criticism, and even poetry of an
unpretentious kind, were produced ; and much excellent liter-
ary work was done, to the great benefit of the moderns. Eu-
clid, and Apollonius of Perga, in mathematics ; Philetas, Calli-
machus, and Apollonius of Rhodes, in poetry ; Aristophanes
of Byzantium, and Aristarchus, in criticism ; Eratosthenes in
chronology and geography ; Hipparchus in astronomical sci-
ence ; and Manetho in history — adorned the Lagid period, and
sufficiently indicate that the Lagid patronage of learning was
not unfruitful. Apelles, too, and Antiphilus produced many
of their best pictures at the Alexandrian court.

The character of Ptolemy Lagi was superior to that of most
of the princes who were his contemporaries. In an age of
treachery and violence, he appears to have remained faithful to
his engagements, and to have been rarely guilty of any blood-
shed that was not absolutely necessary for his own safety and
that of his kingdom. His mode of life was simple and unos-
tentatious. He was a brave soldier, and never scrupled to in-
cur personal danger. The generosity of his temper was
evinced by his frequently setting his prisoners free without
ransom. In his domestic relations he was, however, unhappy.
He married two wives, Euridyce, the daughter of Antipater,
whom he divorced, and Berenice, her companion. By Eury-

198 RAWLINSON

dice he had a son, Ptolemy Ceraunus, who should naturally
have been his successor ; but Berenice prevailed on him in his
old age to prefer her son, Philadelphus ; and Ptolemy Cerau-
nus, offended, became an exile from his country, and an in-
triguer against the interests of his brother and his other rel-
atives. Enmity and bloodshed were thus introduced into the
family ; and to that was shortly afterwards added the crime of
incest, a fatal cause of decay and corruption.

Ptolemy Lagi adorned his capital with a number of great
works. The principal of these were the royal palace, the Mu-
seum, the lofty Pharos, upon the island which formed the port,
the mole or causeway, nearly a mile in length (Heptastadium),
which connected this island with the shore, the Soma or mauso-
leum, containing the body of Alexander, the temple of Serapis
(completed by his son, Philadelphus), and the Hippodrome or
great race-course. He Hkewise rebuilt the inner chamber of
the grand temple at Karnak, and probably repaired many other
Egyptian buildings. After a reign of forty years, having at-
tained to the advanced age of eighty-four, he died in Alexan-
dria, B.C. 283, leaving his crown to his son, Philadelphus, the
eldest of his children by Berenice, whom he had already two
years before associated with him in the kingdom.

Ptolemy H., surnamed Philadelphus, was born at Cos, B.C.
309, and was consequently twenty-six years of age at the com-
mencement of his sole reign. He inherited his father's love
for literature and genius for administration, but not his mili-
tary capacity. Still, he did not abstain altogether even from
aggressive wars, but had an eye to the events which were pass-
ing in other countries, and sought to maintain by his arms the
balance of power established in his father's lifetime. His chief
wars were with the rebel king of Cyrene, his half-brother,
Magas ; with Antiochus I. and Antiochus H., kings of Syria ;
and with Antigonus Gonatas, king of Macedon. They occu-
pied the space of about twenty years, from B.C. 269 to 249.
Philadelphus was fairly successful in them, excepting that he
was forced, as the result of his struggle with Magas, to ac-
knowledge the independence of that monarch.

The home administration of Ptolemy Philadelphus was in
all respects eminently successful. To him belongs the credit

ANCIENT HISTORY 199

of developing to their fullest extent the commercial advantages
which the position of Egypt throws open to her, and of bring-
ing by these means her material prosperity to its culminating
point. By reopening the canal uniting the Red Sea with the
Nile — a construction of the greatest of the Ramesside king^
— and building the port of Arsinoe on the site of the modem
Suez, he united the East and West, allowing the merchandise
of either region to reach the other by water carriage. As this,
however, owing to the dangers of the Red Sea navigation, was
not enough, he constructed two other harbors, and founded
two other cities, each called Berenice, on the eastern African
coast, one nearly in lat. 24°, the other still farther to the south,
probably about lat. 13°. A high-road was opened from the
northern Berenice to Coptos on the Nile (near Thebes), and
the merchandise of India, Arabia, and Ethiopia flowed to Eu-
rope for several centuries chiefly by this route. The Ethiopian
trade was particularly valuable. Not only was ivory imported
largely from this region, but the elephant was hunted on a
large scale, and the hunters' captures were brought alive into
Egypt, where they were used in the military service. Ptole-
mais, in lat. 18° 40', was the emporium for this traffic.

The material prosperity of Egypt which these measures in-
sured was naturally accompanied by a flourishing condition
of the revenue. Philadelphus is said to have derived from
Egypt alone, without counting the tribute in grain, an annual
income of 14,800 talents (more than three and a half millions
sterling), or as much as Darius Hystaspis obtained from the
whole of his vast empire. The revenue was raised chiefly from
customs, but was supplemented from other sources. The re-
moter provinces, Palestine, Phoenicia, Cyprus, etc., seem to
have paid a tribute ; but of the mode of its assessment we know
nothing.

The military force which Philadelphus maintained is said to
have amounted to 200,000 foot and 40,000 horse, besides ele-
phants and war-chariots. He had also a fleet of 1500 vessels,
many of which were of extraordinary size. The number of
rowers required to man these vessels must have exceeded,
rather than fallen short of, 600,000 men.

The fame of Philadelphus depends, however, far less upon

200 RAWLINSON

his military exploits, or his talents for organization and ad-
ministration, than upon his efforts in the cause of learning.
In this respect, if in no other, he surpassed his father, and de-
serves to be regarded as the special cause of the literary glories
of his country. The library which the first Ptolemy had
founded was by the second so largely increased that he has
often been regarded as its author. The minor library of the
Serapeium was entirely of his collection. Learned men were
invited to his court from every quarter ; and literary works of
the highest value were undertaken at his desire or under his
patronage. Among these the most important were the trans-
lation of the Hebrew Scriptures into the Greek language (which
was commenced in his reign and continued under several of
his successors), and the " History of Egypt," derived from the
native records, which was composed in Greek during his reign
by the Egyptian priest Manetho. Philadelphus also patron-
ized painting and sculpture, and adorned his capital with
architectural works of great magnificence.

In his personal character, Philadelphus presents an unfa-
vorable contrast to his father. Immediately upon attaining the
throne he banished Demetrius Phalereus, for the sole offense
that he had advised Ptolemy Lagi against altering the succes-
sion. Shortly afterwards he put to death two of his brothers.
He divorced his first wife Arsinoe, the daughter of Lysima-
chus, and banished her to Coptos in Upper Egypt, in order
that he might contract an incestuous marriage with his full
sister, Arsinoe, who had been already married to his half-
brother Ceraunus. To this princess, who bore him no chil-
dren, he continued tenderly attached, taking in reference to
her the epithet " Philadelphus," and honoring her by giving
her name to several of the cities which he built, and erecting
to her memory a magnificent monument at Alexandria, which
was known as the Arsinoeum. Nor did he long survive her
decease. He died in B.C. 247, of disease, at Alexandria, hav-
ing lived sixty-two years, and reigned thirty-eight, or thirty-
six from the death of his father.

Ptolemy III., surnamed Euergetes (" the Benefactor "), the
eldest son of Philadelphus by his first wife, succeeded him.
This prince was the most enterprising of all the Lagid mon-

ANCIENT HISTORY 201

archs ; and under him Eg>'pt, which had hitherto maintained
a defensive attitude, became an aggressive power, and accom-
plished important conquests. The greater part of these were,
it is true, retained for only a few years ; but others were more
permanent, and became real additions to the empire. The
empire obtained now its greatest extension, comprising, be-
sides Eg\'pt and Nubia, the Cyrenaica, which was recovered
by the marriage of Berenice, daughter and heiress of Magas,
to Euergetes; parts of Ethiopia, especially the tract about
Adule ; a portion of the opposite or western coast of Arabia ;
Palestine, Phoenicia, and Ccele-Syria; Cyprus, Cilicia, Pam-
phylia, Lycia, Caria, and Ionia ; the Cyclades ; and a portion
of Thrace, including the city of Lysimacheia in the Chersonese.

Friendly relations had been established with Rome by Ptol-
emy Philadelphus, as early as B.C. 273. Euergetes continued
this policy, but declined the assistance which the g^eat republic
was anxious to lend him in his Syrian wars. It would seem
that the ambitious projects of Rome and her aspirations after
universal dominion were already, at the least, suspected.

Like his father and grandfather, Euergetes was a patron
of art and letters. He added largely to the great library at
Alexandria, collecting the best manuscripts from all quarters,
sometimes by very questionable means. The poet, ApoUonius
Rhodius, the geographer and chronologist, Eratosthenes, and
the grammarian Aristophanes of Byzantium, adorned his court.
Alexandria does not seem to have owed to him many of her
buildings ; but he gratified his Egyptian subjects by important
architectural works, as well as by the restoration of various
images of their gods, which he had recovered in his Eastern
expedition.

After a reign of twenty-five years, during which he had
enjoyed almost unintemipted success, and had raised Eg>-pt
to perhaps the highest pitch of prosperity that she ever at-
tained, Euergetes died, according to the best authority, by
a natural death ; though there were not wanting persons to
ascribe his decease to the machinations of his son. He left
behind him three children— Ptolemy, who succeeded him,
Magas, and Arsinoe. who became the wife of her elder brother.

The glorious period of the Macedo-Eg>T)tian history termi-

202 RAWLINSON

nates with Euergetes. Three kings of remarkable talent, and
of moderately good moral character, had held the throne for
a Httle more than a century (loi years), and had rendered
Egypt the most flourishing of the kingdoms which had arisen
out of the disruption of Alexander's empire. They were fol-
lowed by a succession of wicked and incapable monarchs,
among whom it is difficult to find one who has any claim to
our respect or esteem. Historians reckon nine Ptolemies after
Euergetes. Except Philometor, who was mild and humane,
Lathyrus, who was amiable but weak, and Ptolemy XII.
(sometimes called Dionysus), who was merely young and in-
competent, they were all, almost equally, detestable.

Ptolemy IV., who assumed the title of Philopator to disarm
the suspicions which ascribed to him the death of his father,
was the eldest son of Euergetes, and ascended the throne B.C.
222. His first acts, after seating himself upon the throne, were
the murder of his mother, Berenice, who had wished her
younger son to obtain the succession ; of his brother, Magas ;
and of his father's brother, Lysimachus. He followed up these
outrages by quarrelling with the Spartan refugee Cleomenes,
and driving him into a revolt, which cost him and his family
their lives. He then contracted an incestuous marriage with
his sister, Arsinoe, and abandoning the direction of affairs to
his minister, Sosibius, the adviser of these measures, gave
himself up to a life of intemperance and profligacy. Agathoc-
lea, a professional singer, and her brother, Agathocles, the
children of a famous courtesan, became his favorites, and ruled
the court, while Sosibius managed the kingdom. To gratify
these minions of his pleasures, Philopator, about B.C. 208,
put to death his wife, Arsinoe, after she had borne him an heir
to the empire.

The weakness of Philopator, and the mismanagement of the
State by Sosibius, who was at once incapable and wicked, laid
the empire open to attack; and it was not long before the
young king of Syria, Antiochus III., took advantage of the
condition of affairs to advance his own pretensions to the pos-
session of the long-disputed tract between Syria Proper and
Egypt. It might have been expected that, under the circum-
stances, he would have been successful. But the Egyptian

ANCIENT HISTORY

203

forces, relaxed though their discipline had been by Sosibius,
were still superior to the Syrians; and the battle of Raphia
(B.C. 217) was a repetition of the lessons taught at Pelusium
and Gaza. The invader was once more defeated upon the bor-
ders, and by the peace which followed, the losses of the two
preceding years were, with one exception, recovered.

The Syrian war was only just brought to a close when dis-
affection showed itself among Philopator's Eg^'ptian subjects.
The causes of their discontent are obscure ; and we are without
any details as to the course of the struggle. But there is evi-
dence that it lasted through a considerable number of years,
and was only brought to a close after much effusion of blood
on both sides.

Notwithstanding his inhumanity and addiction to the worst
forms of vice, Philopator so far observed the traditions of his
house as to continue their patronage of letters. He lived on
familiar terms with the men of learning who frequented his
court, and especially distinguished with his favor the gram-
marian Aristarchus. To show his admiration for Homer, he
dedicated a temple to him. He further even engaged, himself,
in literary pursuits, composing tragedies and poems of various
kinds.

Worn out prematurely by his excesses, Philopator died at
about the age of forty, after he had held the throne for seven-
teen years. He left behind him one only child, a son, named
Ptolemy, the issue of his marriage with Arsinoe. This child,
who at the time of his father's death was no more than five
years old, was immediately acknowledged as king. He reigned
from B.C. 205 to 181, and is distinguished in history by the
surname of Epiphanes. The affairs of Egypt during his minor-
ity were, at first, administered by the infamous Agathocles,
who, however, soon fell a victim to the popular fury, together
with his sister, his mother, and his whole family. The honest
but incompetent Tlepolemus succeeded as regent ; but in the
critical circumstances wherein Egypt was now placed by the
league of Antiochus with Philip of Macedon (see Book IV.),
it was felt that incompetency would be fatal ; and the impor-
tant step was taken of calling in the assistance of the Romans,
who sent M. Lepidus, B.C. 201, to undertake the management

204 RAWLINSON

of affairs. Lepidus saved Egypt from conquest ; but was un-
able, or unwilling, to obtain for her the restoration of the terri-
tory whereof the two spoilers had deprived her by their com-
bined attack. Antiochus succeeded in first deferring and then
evading the restoration of his share of the spoil, while Philip
did not even make a pretense of giving back a single foot of
territory. Thus Egypt lost in this reign the whole of her for-
eign possessions except Cyprus and the Cyrenaica — losses
which were never recovered.

Lepidus, on quitting Egypt, B.C. 199, handed over the ad-
ministration to Aristomenes, the Acarnanian, a man of vigor
and probity, who restored the finances, and put fresh life into
the administration. But the external were followed by internal
troubles. A revolt of the Egyptians, and a conspiracy on the
part of the general, Scopas, showed the danger of a long mi-
nority, and induced the new regent to curtail his own term of
office. At the age of fourteen, Epiphanes was declared of full
age, and assumed the reins of government, B.C. 196.

But little is known of Epiphanes from the time of his as-
suming the government. His marriage with Cleopatra, the
daughter of Antiochus the Great, which had been arranged in
B.C. 199 as a portion of the terms of peace, was not celebrated
till B.C. 193, when he had attained the age of seventeen.
Shortly after this the monarch appears to have quarrelled with
his minister and late guardian, Aristomenes, whom he bar-
barously removed by poison. A certain Polycrates then be-
came his chief adviser and assisted him to quell a second very
serious revolt on the part of the native Egyptians. Towards
the close of his reign he formed designs for the recovery of
Coele-Syria and Palestine, which he proposed to wrest from
Seleucus, who had succeeded his father, Antiochus. But be-
fore he could carry his designs into effect, he was murdered
by his officers, whom he had alarmed by an unguarded ex-
pression, B.C. 181.

By his marriage with Cleopatra, Epiphanes had become the
father of three children, two sons, both of whom received the
name of Ptolemy, and a daughter, called after her mother. The
eldest of these children, who took the surname of Philometor,
succeeded him, and reigned as Ptolemy VI. His age at his

ANCIENT HISTORY 205

accession was only seven, and during his early years he re-
mained under the regency of his mother, whose administration
was vigorous and successful. At her death, in B.C. 173, the
young prince fell under far inferior gfuardianshipr-that of
Eulaeus the eunuch and Lenaeus, ministers at once corrupt and
incapable. These weak men, mistaking audacity for vigor,
rashly claimed from Antiochus Epiphanes the surrender of
Coele-Syria and Palestine, the nominal dowry of the late queen-
mother, and, when their demand was contemptuously rejected,
flew to arms. Their invasion of Syria quickly brought upon
them the vengeance of Antiochus, who defeated their forces
at Pelusium, B.C. 170, and would certainly have conquered
all Egypt, had it not been for the interposition of the Romans,
who made him retire, and even deprived him of all his con-
quests.

By the timely aid thus given, Rome was brought into a new
position with respect to Eg^pt. Hitherto she had merely been
a friendly ally, receiving more favors than she conferred.
Henceforth she was viewed as exercising a sort of protectorate ;
and her right was recognized to interfere in the internal troubles
of the kingdom, and to act as arbiter between rival princes.
The claims of such persons were discussed before the Roman
Senate, and the princes themselves went to Rome in person
to plead their cause. The decision of the Senate was not, in-
deed, always implicitly obeyed; but still Rome exercised a
most important influence from thfs time, not only over the
external policy but over the dynastic squabbles of the
Egyptians.

The joint reign of the two kings, Philometor and Physcon,
which commenced in B.C. 169, continued till B.C. 165, when
the brothers quarrelled and Philometor was driven into exile.
Having gone to Rome and implored assistance from the Sen-
ate, he was re-instated in his kingdom by Roman deputies,
who arranged a partition of the territory between the brothers,
which might have closed the dispute, could Physcon have
remained contented with his allotted portion. But his ambi-
tion and intrigues caused fresh troubles, which were, however,
quelled after a time by the final establishment of Physcon as
king of Cyrene only.

2o6 RAWLINSON

During the continuance of the war between the two brothers,
Demetrius I., who had become king of Syria, B.C. 162, had
made an attempt to obtain possession of Cyprus by bribing
the governor, and had thereby provoked the hostiHty of Philo-
metor. No sooner, therefore, was Philometor free from do-
mestic troubles than, resolving to revenge himself, he induced
Alexander Balas to come forward as a pretender to the Syrian
crown, and lent him the full weight of his support, even giving
him his daughter, Cleopatra, in marriage, B.C. 150. But the
ingratitude of Balas, after he had obtained the throne by Ptol-
emy's aid, alienated his patron. The Egyptian king, having
with some difficulty escaped a treacherous attempt upon his
life, passed over to the side of the younger Demetrius, gave
Cleopatra in marriage to him, and succeeded in seating him
upon the throne. In the last battle, however, which was fought
near Antioch, he was thrown from his horse, and lost his life,
B.C. 146.

Ptolemy Philometor left behind him three children, the issue
of his marriage with his full sister, Cleopatra, viz., a son, Ptol-
emy, who was proclaimed king, under the name of Eupator
(or Philopator, according to Lepsius), and two daughters, both
called Cleopatra, the elder married first to Alexander Balas
and then to Demetrius II., the younger still a virgin. Eupator,
after reigning a few days, was deposed and then murdered by
his uncle, Physcon, the king of Cyrene, who claimed and ob-
tained the throne.

Ptolemy Physcon, called also Euergetes II., acquired the
throne in consequence of an arrangement mediated by the
Romans, who stipulated that he should marry his sister Cleo-
patra, the widow of his brother, Philometor. Having become
king in this way, his first act was the murder of his nephew.
He then proceeded to treat with the utmost severity all those
who had taken part against him in the recent contest, killing
some and banishing others. By these measures he created such"
alarm, that Alexandria became half emptied of its inhabitants,
and he was forced to invite new colonists to repeople it. Mean-
while he gave himself up to gluttony and other vices, and be-
came bloated to an extraordinary degree, and so corpulent that
he could scarcely walk. He further repudiated Cleopatra, his

ANCIENT HISTORY 207

sister, though she had borne him a son, Memphitis, and took
to wife her daughter, called also Qeopatra, the child of his
brother, Philometor. After a while his cruelties and excesses
disgfusted the Alexandrians, who broke out into frequent re-
volts. Several of these were put down ; but at last Physcon
was compelled to fly to Cyprus, and his sister Cleopatra was
made queen, B.C. 130.

On the re-establishment of Physcon in his kingdom, he
resolved to revenge himself on Demetrius for the support
which he had given to Cleopatra. He therefore brought for-
ward the pretender Alexander Zabinas, and lent him such sup-
port that he shortly became king of Syria, B.C. 126. But Za-
binas, like his reputed father, Balas, proved ungrateful; and
the offended Physcon proceeded to pull down the throne which
he had erected, joining Antiochus Grypus against Zabinas, and
giving him his daughter Tryphaena, in marriage. The result
was the ruin of Zabinas, and the peaceful establishment of
Grypus, with whom Physcon lived on friendly terms during
the remainder of his life.

Physcon died in B.C. 117, and was succeeded by his eldest
son, Ptolemy IX., commonly distinguished by the epithet of
Lathyrus. Egypt now lost the Cyrenaica, which was be-
queathed by Physcon to his natural son, Apion, who at his
death made it over to the Romans. The ties which bound
Cyprus to Egypt also became relaxed, for Lathyrus, and his
brother, Alexander, alternately ^held it, almost as a separate
kingdom. The reign of Lathyrus, which commenced B.C.
117, did not terminate till B.C. 81, thus covering a space of
thirty-six years; but during one-half of this time he was a
fugitive from Egypt, ruling only over Cyprus, while his
brother took his place at Alexandria. We must divide his
reign into three periods — the first lasting from B.C. 117 to
107, a space of ten years, during which he was nominal king
of Egypt under the tutelage of his mother ; the second, from
B.C. 107 to 89, eighteen years, which he spent in Cyprus ; and
the third, from B.C. 89 to 81, eight years, during which he
ruled Egypt as actual and sole monarch.

Lathyrus left behind him one legitimate child only, Berenice,
his daughter by Selene, who succeeded him upon the throne.

2o8 RAWLINSON

and remained for six months sole monarch. She was then
married to her first cousin, Ptolemy Alexander II., the son of
Ptolemy Alexander L, who claimed the crown of Egypt under
the patronage of the great Sulla. It was agreed that they
should reign conjointly; but within three weeks of his mar-
riage, Alexander put his wife to death. This act so enraged the
Alexandrians that they rose in revolt against the murderer
and slew him in the public gymnasium, B.C. 80.

A time of trouble followed. The succession was disputed
between two illegitimate sons of Lathyrus, two legitimate sons
of Selene, the sister of Lathyrus, by Antiochus Eusebes, king
of Syria, her third husband, and probably other claimants.
Roman influence was wanted to decide the contest, and Rome
for some reason or other hung back. A further disintegration
of the empire was the consequence. The younger of the two
sons of Ptolemy Lathyrus seized Cyprus, and made it a sep-
arate kingdom. The elder seems to have possessed himself
of a part of Egypt. Other parts of Egypt appear to have fallen
into the power of a certain Alexander, called by some writers
Ptolemy Alexander III., who was driven out after some years,
and, flying to Tyre, died there and bequeathed Egypt to the
Romans.

Ultimately the whole of Egypt passed under the sway of the
elder of the two illegitimate sons of Lathyrus, who took the
titles of Neos Dionysos (" the New Bacchus "), Philopator, and
Philadelphus, but was most commonly known as Auletes, the
" Flute-player." The years of his reign were counted from
B.C. 80, though he can scarcely have become king of all Egypt
till fifteen years later, B.C. 65. It was his great object during
the earlier portion of his reign to get himself acknowledged
by the Romans ; but this he was not able to effect till B.C. 59,
the year of Caesar's consulship, when his bribes were effectual.
But his orgies and his " fluting " had by this time disgusted
the Alexandrians; so that, when he increased the weight of
taxation in order to replenish his treasury, exhausted by the
vast sums he had spent in bribery, they rose against him, and
after a short struggle, drove him from his kingdom. Auletes
fled to Rome ; and the Alexandrians placed upon the throne
his two daughters, Tryphsena and Berenice, of whom the for-

ANCIENT HISTORY

209

mer lived only a year, while the latter retained the crown till
the restoration of her father, B.C. 55. He returned under the
protection of Pompey, who sent Gabinius at the head of a
strong Roman force to reinstate him. The Alexandrians were
compelled to submit ; and Auletes immediately executed Be-
renice, who had endeavored to retain the crown and had resist-
ed his return in arms. Auletes then reigned about three years
and a half in tolerable peace, under the protection of a Roman
garrison. He died B.C. 51, having done as much as in him
lay to degrade and ruin his country.

Ptolemy Auletes left behind him four children — Qeopatra,
aged seventeen ; a boy, Ptolemy, aged thirteen ; another boy,
called also Ptolemy ; and a girl, called Arsinoe. The last two
were of very tender age. He left the crown, under approval
of the Romans, to Cleopatra and the elder Ptolemy, who were
to rule conjointly, and to be married when Ptolemy was of full
age. These directions were carried out; but the imperious
spirit of Cleopatra ill brooked any control, and it was not long
ere she quarrelled with her boy-husband, and endeavored to
deprive him of the kingdom. War followed ; and Qeopatra,
driven to take refuge in Syria, was fortunate enough to secure
the protection of Julius Caesar, whom she fascinated by her
charms, B.C. 48. With his aid she obtained the victory over
her brother, who perished in the struggle. Cleopatra was now
established sole queen, B.C. 47, but on condition that she
married in due time her other brother, the younger son of
Auletes. Observing the letter of this agreement, Qeopatra
violated its spirit by having her second husband, shortly after
the wedding, removed by poison, B.C. 44. The remainder of
'Cleopatra's reign was, almost to its close, prosperous. Pro-
tected by Julius Caesar during his lifetime, she succeeded soon
after his decease in fascinating Antony, B.C. 41, and making
him her slave for the rest of his lifetime. The details of this
period belong to Roman rather than to Egyptian history ; and
will be treated in the last book of this Manual. It will be suffi-
cient to note here that the latest descendant of the Ptolemies
retained the royal title to the end, and showed something of the
spirit of a queen in preferring death to captivity, and perishing
upon the capture of her capital, B.C. 30.
u

2IO RAWLINSON

Part III.

History of Macedonia, and of Greece , front the Death of Alexander
to the Roman Conquest, B. C. J2j to 146. *

Grecian history had been suspended during the time of Alex-
ander's career of conquest. A slight disturbance of the general
tranquillity had indeed occurred, when Alexander plunged into
the unknown countries beyond the Zagros range, by the move-
ment against Antipater, which the Spartan king, Agis, orig-
inated in B.C. 330. But the disturbance was soon quelled.
Agis was defeated and slain ; and from this time the whole of
Greece remained perfectly tranquil until the news came of Al-
exander's premature demise during the summer of B.C. 323.
Then, indeed, hope rose high ; and a great effort was made to
burst the chains which bound Greece to the footstool of the
Macedonian kings, Athens, under Demosthenes and Hyper-
ides, taking, as was natural, the lead in the struggle for free-
dom. A large confederacy was formed ; and the Lamian War
was entered upon in the confident expectation that the effect
would be the liberation of Greece from the yoke of her op-
pressor. But the result disappointed these hopes. After a
bright gleam of success, the confederate Greeks were com-
pletely defeated at Crannon, B.C. 322, and the yoke of Mace-
donia was riveted upon them more firmly than ever.

The position of Antipater, as supreme ruler of Macedonia,
was far from being safe and assured. The female members of
the Macedonian royal family — Olympias, the widow of Philip ;
Cleopatra, her daughter; Cynane, daughter of Philip by an
Illyrian mother; and Eurydice, daughter of Cynane by her

* Sources. The sources for this history are nearly the same as those
which have been cited for the contemporary history of Syria and Egypt.
The chief ancient authorities are Diodorus Siculus (books xix.-xxxii.,
the first two of which only are complete), Polybius, Justin, Plutarch
(" Vitae Demetrii, Pyrrhi, JEmilii Paulli, Agidis, Cleomenis, Arati, Phil-
opoemonis et Flaminini"), and Livy (books xxvi.-xlv., and Epitomes of
books xlvi.-lii.). To these may be added, for the Macedonian chronol-
ogy, Eusebius (" Chronicorum Canonum liber prior," cxxxviii.), and
for occasional facts in the history, Pausanias.

.^^*>|»; - .':'^A::*:'fi^^-ii

^g^mm

W^v

MENTAL EDUCATfOlf OF A GREEK YOUTH.

Photogravure from a section of the original painting by Otto KniHe.

In this section of Knilie's painting Socrates and Plato are shown surrounded
by their friends and disciples.

ANCIENT HISTORY an

husband Amyntas (himself a first cousin of Alexander) — were,
one and all, persons of ability and ambition, who saw with
extreme dissatisfaction the aggrandizement of the generals of
Alexander and the low condition into which the royal power
had fallen, shared between an infant and an imbecile. Dissatis-
fied, moreover, with their own positions and prospects, they
commenced intrigues for the purpose of improving them.
Olympias first offered the hand of Cleopatra to Leonnatus,
who was to have turned against Antipater, if he had been suc-
cessful in his Grecian expedition. When the death of Leon-
natus frustrated this scheme, Olympias cast her eyes farther
abroad, and fixed on Perdiccas as the chief to whom she would
betroth her daughter. Meanwhile, Cynane boldly crossed over
to Asia with Eurydice, and offered her in marriage to Philip
Arrhidaeus, the nominal king. To gratify Olympias, who hated
these members of the royal house, Perdiccas put Cynane to
death ; and he would probably have likewise removed Eu-
rydice, had not the soldiers, exasperated at the mother's mur-
der, compelled him to allow the marriage of the daughter with
Philip. Meanwhile, he consented to Olympias's schemes, pre-
pared to repudiate his wife, Nicaea, the daughter of Antipater,
and hoped with the aid of his friend, Eumenes, to make himself
master of the whole of Alexander's empire. (See Second
Period.)

The designs of Perdiccas, and his intrigues with Olympias.
having been discovered by Antigonus, and the life of that chief
being in danger from Perdiccas in consequence, he fled to
Europe in the course of B.C. 322, and informed Antipater and
Craterus of their peril. Fully appreciating the importance of
the intelligence, those leaders at once concluded a league with
Ptolemy, and in the spring of B.C. 321 invaded Asia for the
purpose of attacking their rival. Here they found Eumenes
prepared to resist them ; and so great was the ability of that
general, that, though Perdiccas had led the greater portion of
his forces against Egypt, he maintained the war successfully,
defeating and killing Craterus, and holding Antipater in check.
But the murder of Perdiccas by his troops, and their fraterni-
zation with their opponents, changed the whole face of affairs.
Antipater found himself, without an effort, master of the situa-

212 RAWLINSON

tion. Proclaimed sole regent by the soldiers, he took the cus-
tody of the royal persons, re-distributed the satrapies (see
Second Period), and, returning into Macedonia, held for about
two years the first position in the empire. He was now, how-
ever, an old man, and his late campaigns had probably shaken
him ; at any rate, soon after his return to Europe, he died, B.C.
318, leaving the regency to his brother officer, the aged Polys-
perchon.

The disappointment of Cassander, the elder of the two sur-
viving sons of Antipater, produced the second great war be-
tween the generals of Alexander. Cassander, having begun
to intrigue against Polysperchon, was driven from Macedonia
by the regent, and, flying to Antigonus, induced him to em-
brace his cause. The league followed between Antigonus,
Ptolemy, and Cassander on the one hand, and Polysperchon
and Eumenes on the other (see Second Period), Antigonus
undertaking to contend with Eumenes in Asia, while Cassan-
der aflforded employment to Polysperchon in Europe.

In the war which ensued between Cassander and Polys-
perchon, the former proved eventually superior. Polysper-
chon had on his side the influence of Olympias, which was
great; and his proclamation of freedom to the Greeks was
a judicious step, from which he derived considerable advan-
tage. But neither as a soldier nor as a statesman was he Cas-
sander's equal. He lost Athens by an imprudent delay, and
failed against Megalopolis through want of military ability.
His policy in allowing Olympias to gratify her hatreds with-
out let or hindrance was ruinous to his cause, by thoroughly
alienating the Macedonians. Cassander 's triumph in B.C. 316
reduced him to a secondary position, transferring the supreme
authority in Macedonia to his rival.

The reign of Cassander over Macedonia, which now com-
menced, lasted from B.C. 316 to 296, a period of twenty years.
The talents of this prince are unquestionable, but his moral
conduct fell below that of even the majority of his contempo-
raries, which was sufficiently reprehensible. His bad faith
towards Olympias was followed, within a few years, by the
murders of Roxana and the infant Alexander, by complicity in
the murder of Hercules, the illegitimate son of Alexander the

ANCIENT HISTORY

213

Great, and by treacherj' towards Polysperchon, who was first
seduced into crime and then defrauded of his reward. Cas-
sander, however, was a clever statesman, a good general, and a
brave soldier. His first step on obtaining possession of Mace-
donia was to marry Thessalonice, the sister of Alexander the
Great, and thus to connect himself with the family of the con-
queror. Next, fearing the ambition of Antigonus, who, af-
ter his victory over Eumenes, aspired to rule the whole em-
pire (see Second Period), he entered into the league of the
satraps against that powerful commander, and bore his part in
the great war, which, commencing B.C. 315, on the return of
Antigonus from the East, terminated B.C. 301, at the battle of
Ipsus. In this war Cassander, though he displayed unceasing
activity, and much ability for intrigue, was on the whole unsuc-
cessful ; and he would probably have lost Greece and Mace-
donia to his powerful adversary, had not the advance of Seleu-
cus from Babylon and the defeat of Antigonus at Ipsus saved
him.

Cassander did not live long to enjoy the tranquillity which
the defeat and death of Antigonus at Ipsus brought him. He
died B.C. 298, three years after Ipsus, leaving the crown to the
eldest of his three sons by Thessalonice, Philip. This prince
was carried off by sickness before he had reigned a year ; and the
Macedonian dominions at his death fell to Thessalonice, his
mother, who made a division of them between her two sur-
viving sons, Antipater and Alexander, assigning to the latter
Western, and to the former Eastern Macedonia.

Antipater, who regarded himself as wronged in the partition,
having wreaked his vengeance on his mother by causing her to
be assassinated, applied for aid to his wife's father, Lysima-
chus ; while Alexander, fearing his brother's designs, called in
the help of Pyrrhus the Epirote and of Demetrius, B.C. 297.
Demetrius, after the defeat of Ipsus, had still contrived to main-
tain the position of a sovereign. Rejected at first by Athens,
he had besieged and taken that city, had recovered possession
of Attica, the Megarid, and g^eat portions of the Peloponnese,
and had thus possessed himself of a considerable power. Ap-
pealed to by Alexander, he professed to embrace his cause ; but
ere long he took advantage of his position to murder the young

214 RAWLINSON

prince, and possess himself of his kingdom. Antipater was
about the same time put to death by Lysimachus, B.C. 294.

The kingdom of Demetrius comprised, not only Macedonia,
but Thessaly, Attica, Megaris, and the greater part of the Pelo-
ponnese. Had he been content with these territories, he might
have remained quietly in the possession of them, for the fam-
ilies of Alexander the Great and of Antipater were extinct,
and the connection of Demetrius with Seleucus, who had mar-
ried his daughter (see Third Period, Part L), would have
rendered his neighbors cautious of meddling with him. But
the ambition of Demetrius was insatiate, and his self-confidence
unbounded. After establishing his authority in Central
Greece and twice taking Thebes, he made an unprovoked at-
tack upon Pyrrhus, B.C. 290, from whom he desired to wrest
some provinces ceded to him by the late king, Alexander. In
this attempt he completely failed, whereupon he formed a new
project. Collecting a vast army, he let it be understood that
he claimed the entire dominion of his father, Antigonus, and
was about to proceed to its recovery, B.C. 288. Seleucus and
Lysimachus, whom this project threatened, were induced, in
consequence, to encourage Pyrrhus to carry his arms into
Macedonia on the one side, while Lysimachus himself invaded
it on the other. Placed thus between two fires, and finding at
the same time that his soldiers were not to be depended upon,
Demetrius, in B.C. 287, relinquished the Macedonian throne,
and escaped secretly to Demetrias, the city which he had built
on the Pagasean Gulf and had made a sort of capital. From
hence he proceeded on the expedition, which cost him his lib-
erty, against Asia. (See Third Period, Part L)

On the flight of Demetrius, Pyrrhus of Epirus became king
of the greater part of Macedonia ; but a share of the spoil was
at once claimed by Lysimachus, who received the tract adjoin-
ing his own territories. A mere share, however, did not long
satisfy the Macedonian chieftain. Finding that the rule of an
Epirotic prince was distasteful to the Macedonians, he con-
trived after a little while to pick a quarrel with his recent ally,
and having invaded his Macedonian territories, forced him to
relinquish them and retire to his own country, after a reign
which lasted less than a year.

ANCIENT HISTORY •!$

By the success of Lysimachus, Macedonia became a mere
appendage to a large kingdom, which reached from the Halys
to the Pindus range, its centre being Thrace, and its capital
Lysimacheia in the Chersonese. These circumstances might
not by themselves have alienated the Macedonians, though
they could scarcely have failed after a time to arouse discon-
tent ; but when Lysimachus, after suffering jealousy and dis-
sension to carry ruin into his own family, proceeded to acts of
tyranny and violence towards his nobles and other subjects,
these last called on Seleucus Nicator to interfere for their pres-
ervation ; and that monarch, having invaded the territories of
his neighbor, defeated him in the battle of Corupedion, where
Lysimachus, fighting with his usual gallantry, was not only
beaten but slain.

By the victory of Conipedion, Seleucus Nicator became
master of the entire kingdom of Lysimachus, and, with the ex-
ception of Egypt, appeared to have reunited almost the whole
of the dominions of Alexander, But this union was short-
lived. Within a few weeks of his victory, Seleucus was mur-
dered by Ptolemy Ceraunus, the Egyptian refugee whom he
had protected ; and the Macedonians, indifferent by whom they
were ruled, accepted the Egyptian prince without a murmur.

The short reign of Ptolemy Ceraunus (B.C. 281 to 279) was
stained by crimes and marked by many imprudences. Re-
garding the two sons of Lysimachus by Arsinoe, his half-sister,
as possible rivals, he persuaded her into a marriage, in order to
get her children into his power ; and, having prevailed with the
credulous princess, first murdered her sons before her eyes, and
then banished her to Samothrace. Escaping to Egypt, she
became the wife of her brother, Philadelphus, and would prob-
ably have induced him to avenge her wrongs, had not the
crime of Ceraunus received its just punishment in another way.
A great invasion of the Gauls— one of those vast waves of mi-
gration which from time to time sweep over the world— oc-
curring just as Ceraunus felt himself in secure possession of
his kingdom, disturbed his ease, and called for wise and vigor-
ous measures of resistance. Ceraunus met the crisis with suf-
ficient courage, but with a complete absence of prudent coun-
sel. Instead of organizing a united resistance to a common

2i6 RAWLINSON

enemy, or conciliating a foe whom he was too weak to oppose
singly, he both exasperated the Gauls by a contemptuous mes-
sage and refused the proffers of assistance which he received
from his neighbors. Opposing the unaided force of Macedon
to their furious onset, he was completely defeated in a great
battle, B.C. 279, and, falling into the hands of his enemies, was
barbarously put to death. The Gauls then ravaged Mace-
donia far and wide ; nor was it till B.C. 277 that Macedonia once
more obtained a settled government.

On the retirement of the Gauls, Antipater, the nephew of
Cassander, came forward for the second time, and was accepted
as king by a portion, at any rate, of the Macedonians. But a
new pretender soon appeared upon the scene. Antigonus
Gonatas, the son of Demetrius Poliorcetes, who had main-
tained himself since that monarch's captivity as an independent
prince in Central or Southern Hellas, claimed the throne once
filled by his father, and, having taken into his service a body of
Gallic mercenaries, defeated Antipater and made himself mas-
ter of Macedonia. His pretensions being disputed by Anti-
ochus Soter, the son of Seleucus, who had succeeded to the
throne of Syria, he engaged in war with that prince, crossing
into Asia and uniting his forces with those of Nicomedes, the
Bithynian king, whom Antiochus was endeavoring to conquer.
To this combination Antiochus was forced to yield ; reliquish-
ing his claims, he gave his sister, Phila, in marriage to Antigo-
nus, and recognized him as king of Macedonia. Antigonus
upon this fully established his power, repulsing a fresh attack
of the Gauls, and recovering Cassandreia from the cruel tyrant,
Apollodorus.

But he was not long left in repose. In B.C. 274, Pyrrhus
finally quitted Italy, having failed in all his schemes, but having
made himself a great reputation. Landing in Epirus with a
scanty force, he found the condition of Macedonia and of
Greece favorable to his ambition. Antigonus had no hold on
the affections of his subjects, whose recollections of his father,
Demetrius, were unpleasing. The Greek cities were, some of
them, under tyrants, others occupied against their will by
Macedonian garrisons. Above all, Greece and Macedonia
were full of military adventurers, ready to flock to any stand-

ANCIENT HISTORY 217

ard which offered them a fair prospect of plunder. Pyrrhus,
therefore, having taken a body of Celts into his pay, declared
war against Antigonus, B.C. 2^l, and suddenly invaded Mace-
donia. Antigonus gave him battle, but was worsted owing to
the disaffection of his soldiers, and, being twice defeated, be-
came a fugitive and a wanderer.

The victories of Pyrrhus, and his son Ptolemy, placed the
Macedonian crown upon the brow of the former, who might
not improbably have become the founder of a great power, if
he could have turned his attention to consolidation, instead of
looking out for fresh conquests. But the arts and employ-
ments of peace had no charm for the Epirotic knight-errant.
Hardly was he settled in his seat, when, upon the invitation of
Cleonymus of Sparta, he led an expedition into the Pelopon-
nese, and attempted the conquest of that rough and difficult
region. Repulsed from Sparta, which he had hoped to sur-
prise, he sought to cover his disappointment by the capture of
Argos ; but here he was still more unsuccessful. Antigonus,
now once more at the head of an army, watched the city, pre-
pared to dispute its occupation, while the lately threatened
Spartans hung upon the invader's rear. In a desperate at-
tempt to seize the place by night, the adventurous Epirote was
first wounded by a soldier and then slain by the blow of a tile,
thrown from a house-top by an Argive woman, B.C. 271.

On the death of Pyrrhus the Macedonian throne was recov-
ered by Antigonus, who commenced his second reign by es-
tablishing his influence over most of the Peloponnese, after
which he was engaged in a long war with the Athenians (B.C.
268 to 263), who were supported by Sparta and by Egypt.
These allies rendered, however, but little help; and Athens
must have soon succumbed, had not Antigonus been called
away to Macedonia by the invasion of Alexander, son of Pyr-
rhus. This enterprising prince carried, at first, all before him,
and was even acknowledged as Macedonian king; but ere
long, Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, having defeated Alex-
ander near Derdia, re-established his father's dominion over
Macedon, and, invading Epirus, succeeded in driving the Epi-
rotic monarch out of his paternal kingdom. The Epirots soon
restored him ; but from this time he remained at peace with

2i8 RAWLINSON

Antigonus, who was able once more to devote his undivided
attention to the subjugation of the Greeks. In B.C. 263, he
took Athens, and rendered himself complete master of Attica ;
and, in B.C. 244, nineteen years afterwards, he contrived by a
treacherous stratagem to obtain possession of Corinth. But
at this point his successes ceased. A power had been quietly
growing up in a corner of the Peloponnese which was to be-
come a counterpoise to Macedonia, and to give to the closing
scenes of Grecian history an interest little inferior to that which
had belonged to its earlier pages. The Achaean League, re-
suscitated from its ashes about the time of the invasion of the
Gauls, B.C. 280, had acquired in the space of thirty-seven years
sufficient strength and consistency to venture on defying the
puissant king of Macedon and braving his extreme displeas-
ure. In B.C. 243, Aratus, the general of the League and in a
certain sense its founder, by a sudden and well-planned attack
surprised and took Corinth; which immediately joined the
League, whereto it owed its freedom. This success was fol-
lowed by others. Megara, Trcezen, and Epidaurus threw oflf
their allegiance to Antigonus and attached themselves to the
League in the course of the same year. Athens and Argos
were threatened ; and the League assumed an attitude of un-
mistakable antagonism to the power and pretensions of Mace-
don. Antigonus, grown timorous in his old age, met the bold
aggressions of the League with no overt acts of hostility. Con-
tenting himself with inciting the ^tolians to attack the new
power, he remained wholly on the defensive, neither attempt-
ing to recover the lost towns, nor to retaliate by any invasion
of Achgea.

Antigonus Gonatas died B.C. 239, at the age of eighty, hav-
ing reigned in all thirty-seven years. He left his crown to his
son, Demetrius II., who inherited his ambition without his
talents. The first acts of Demetrius were to form a close
alliance with Epirus, now under the rule of Olympias, Alexan-
der's widow ; to accept the hand of her daughter Phthia, where-
by he offended his queen, Stratonice, and through her Seleu-
cus, the Syrian king ; and to break with the ^tolians, who were
seeking at this time to deprive Olympias of a portion of her
dominions. The ^tolians, alarmed, sought the alliance of the

ANCIENT HISTORY

219

Achaean League; and in the war which followed, Demetrius
was opposed by both these important powers. He contrived,
however, to defeat Aratus in Thessaly, to reduce Bceotia, and
to re-establish Macedonian ascendancy as far as the Isthmus.
But this was all that he could effect. No impression was made
by his arms on either of the great Leagues. No aid was given
to Epirus, where the royal family was shortly afterwards ex-
terminated. Demetrius was perhaps recalled to Macedonia
by the aggressive attitude of the Dardanians, who certainly at-
tacked him in his later years, and gave him a severe defeat.
It is thought by some that he perished in the battle. But this
is uncertain.

The most important fact of this period was the interference,
now for the first time, of the Romans in the affairs of Greece.
The embassy to the ^Etolians, warning them against interfer-
ence with Acarnania, belongs probably to the year B.C. 238 ;
that to the ^Etolians and Achaeans announcing the success of
the Roman arms against the lUyrians, belongs certainly to B.C.
228. In the same year, or the year preceding, Corcyra, Apol-
lonia, and Epidamnus became Roman dependencies.

Demetrius left an only son, Philip, who was but eight years
old at his decease. He was at once acknowledged king ; but
owing to his tender age, his guardianship was undertaken by
his kinsman, Antigonus, the son of his father's first cousin, De-
metrius, " the Handsome." It was, consequently, this prince
who directed the policy of Macedonia during the period which
immediately followed on the death of Demetrius II. — who, in
fact, ruled Macedonia for nine years, from B.C. 229 to 220.
The events of this period are of first-rate interest, including,
as they do, the last display of patriotism and vigor at Sparta,
and the remarkable turn of affairs whereby Macedonia, from
being the deadly foe of the Achaean League, became its friend,
ally, and protector.

The other wars of Antigonus Doson were comparatively
unimportant. He repulsed an attack of the Dardanians, who
had defeated his predecessor, suppressed an insurrection in
Thessaly, and made an expedition by sea against South-west-
ern Asia Minor, which is said to have resulted in the conquest
of Caria. It was impossible, however, that he should long hold

2 20 RAWLINSON

this distant dependency, which shortly reverted to Egypt, the
chief maritime power of this period. Soon after his return
from Greece, Antigonus died of disease, having held the sover-
eignty for the space of nine years. He was succeeded by the
rightful heir to the throne, Philip, the son of Demetrius II.,
in whose name he had carried on the government.

Philip, who was still no more than seventeen years old, was
left by his kinsman to the care of tutors and guardians. He
seemed to ascend the throne at a favorable moment, when
Macedonia, at very little expenditure of either men or money,
had recovered Greece, had repulsed her Illyrian adversaries,
and was released, by the death of Ptolemy Euergetes, from
her most formidable enemy among the successors of Alexan-
der. But all these advantages were neutralized by the rash
conduct of the king himself, who first allied himself with Han-
nibal against Rome, and then with Antiochus against Egypt.
No doubt Philip saw, more clearly than most of his contempo-
raries, the dangerously aggressive character of the Roman
power; nor can we blame him for seeking to form coalitions
against the conquering republic. But, before venturing to
make Rome his enemy, he should have consolidated his power
at home; and, when he made the venture, he should have
been content with no half measures, but should have thrown
himself, heart and soul, into the quarrel.

The first war in which the young prince engaged was one
that had broken out between the Achaeans and ^tolians. The
vEtolians, who now for the first time show themselves a really
first-rate Greek power, had been gradually growing in impor-
tance, from the time when they provoked the special anger of
Antipater in the Lamian War, and were threatened with trans-
plantation into Asia. Somewhat earlier than this they had
organized themselves into a Federal Republic, and had thus set
the example which the Achaeans followed half a century after-
wards. Some account of their institutions, and of the extent
of their power, is requisite for the proper understanding both
of their strength and of their weakness.

The war of the ^tolians and Achaeans was provoked by
the former, who thought they saw in the accession of so young
a prince as Philip to the throne of Macedon a favorable oppor-

ANCIENT HISTORY 221

tunity for advancing their interests after their own peculiar
method. It commenced with the invasion of Messenia, and
would probably have been ruinous to Achaea, had Philip al-
lowed himself to be detained in Macedonia by apprehensions
of danger from his Illyrian neighbors, or had he shown less
vigor and ability in his proceedings after he entered Greece.
Though thwarted by the treachery of his minister and guard-
ian, Apelles, who was jealous of the influence of Aratus, and
but little aided by any of his Greek allies, he gained a series
of brilliant successes, overrunning most of ^tolia, capturing
Thermon, the capital, detaching from the League Phigaleia in
Arcadia and the Phthian Thebes, and showing himself in all
respects a worthy successor of the old Macedonian conquerors.
But after four years of this successful warfare, he allowed him-
self to be diverted from what should have been his first object,
the complete reduction of Greece, by the prospect which
opened upon him after Hannibal's victory at Lake Thrasimene.
At the instance of Demetrius of Pharos he concluded a peace
with the i^tolians on the principle of uti possedetis, and, retiring
into Macedonia, entered upon those negotiations which in-
volved him shortly afterwards in a war with Rome.

The negotiations opened by Philip with Hannibal, B.C. 216,
interrupted by the capture of his ambassadors, were brought
to a successful issue in B.C. 215 ; and in the ensuing year Philip
began his first war with Rome by the siege of Apollonia, the
chief Roman port in Illyricum. By securing this place, he ex-
pected to facilitate the invasion of Italy on which he was bent,
and to prepare the way for that complete expulsion of the
Romans from the eastern coast of the gulf, which was one of
the objects he had most at heart. But he soon learned that the
Romans were an enemy with whom, under any circumstances
whatever, it was dangerous to contend. Defeated by M. Vale-
rius, who surprised his camp at night, he was obliged to bum
his ships and make a hasty retreat. His schemes of invasion
were rudely overthrown; and, three years later, B.C. 211, the
Romans, by concluding a treaty with i^tolia and her allies
(Elis, Sparta, the Illyrian chief, Scerdilaidas, and Attains, king
of Pergamus), gave the war a new character, transferring it
into Philip's own dominions, and so occupying him there that

222 RAWLINSON

he was forced to implore aid from Carthage instead of bringing
succor to Hannibal. After many changes of fortune, the Mace-
donian monarch, having by the hands of his ally, Philopoemen,
defeated the Spartans at Mantineia, induced the ^tolians to
conclude a separate peace; after which the Romans, anxious
to concentrate all their energies on the war with Carthage,
consented to a treaty on terms not dishonorable to either
party.

Philip had now a breathing-space, and might have employed
it to consolidate his power in Macedonia and Greece, before
the storm broke upon him which was manifestly impending.
But his ambition was too great, and his views were too grand,
to allow of his engaging in a work so humble and unexciting
as consolidation. The Macedonian monarch had by this time
disappointed all his earlier promise of virtue and moderation.
He had grown profligate in morals, criminal in his acts, both
public and private, and strangely reckless in his policy. Grasp-
ing after a vast empire, he neglected to secure what he already
possessed, and, while enlarging the bounds, he diminished the
real strength of his kingdom. It became now his object to
extend his dominion on the side of Asia, and with this view he
first (about B.C. 205) concluded a treaty with Antiochus the
Great for the partition of the territories of Egypt, and then
(B.C. 203) plunged into a war with Attains and the Rhodians.
His own share of the Egyptian spoils was to comprise Lysi-
macheia and the adjoining parts of Thrace, Samos, Ephesus,
Caria, and perhaps other portions of Asia Minor, He began
at once to take possession of these places. A war with Attains
and Rhodes was almost the necessary result of such proceed-
ings, since their existence depended on the maintenance of a
balance of power in these parts, and the instinct of self-preser-
vation naturally threw them on the Egyptian side. Philip,
moreover, took no steps to disarm their hostility : on the con-
trary, before war was declared, he burnt the arsenal of the
Rhodians by the hands of an emissary ; and in the war itself,
one of his opening acts was to strengthen Prusias, the enemy
of Attains, by making over to him the ^tolian dependency,
Cius. The main event of the war was the great defeat of his
fleet by the combined squadrons of the two powers off Chios,

ANCIENT HISTORY

223

B.C. 201, a defeat ill compensated by the subsequent victory of
Lade. Still Philip was, on the whole, successful, and accom-
plished the main objects which he had in view, making himself
master of Thasos, Samos, Chios, of Caria, and of many places
in Ionia. Unassisted by Egypt, the allies were too weak to
protect her territory, and Philip obtained the extension of do-
minion which he had desired, but at the cost of provoking the
intense hostility of two powerful naval states, and the ill-will
of -<Etolia, which he had injured by his conquest of Cius.

These proceedings of Philip in the yEgean had, moreover,
been well calculated to bring about a rupture of the peace with
Rome. Friendly relations had existed between the Romans
and Egypt from the time of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and even
from an earlier date Rhodes and Rome had been on terms
of intimacy. Attains was an actual ally of Rome, and had
been included in the late treaty. It is therefore not surprising
that in B.C. 200 Rome remonstrated, and, when Philip rejected
every demand, declared the peace at an end and renewed the
war.

The Second War of Philip with Rome is the turning-point
in the history of Ancient Europe, deciding, as it did, the ques-
tion whether Macedon and Rome should continue two parallel
forces, dividing between them the general direction of Euro-
pean affairs, or whether the power of the former should be
completely swept away, and the dominion of the latter over the
civilized West finally and firmly established. It is perhaps
doubtful what the result would have been, if Philip had guided
his conduct by the commonest rules of prudence; if, aware
of the nature of the conflict into which he was about to be
plunged, he had conciliated instead of alienating his natural
supports, and had so been able to meet Rome at the head of
a general confederacy of the Hellenes. As it was, Greece was
at first divided, the Rhodians, Athenians, and Athamanians
siding with Rome ; .^olia, Epirus, Achaea, and Sparta being
neutral ; and Thessaly, Boeotia, Acamania, Megalopolis, and
Argos supporting Philip ; while in the latter part of the war,
after Flamininus had proclaimed himself the champion of Gre-
cian freedom, almost the entire force of Hellas was thrown on
the side of the Romans. Rome had also the alUance of the

2 24 RAWLINSON

Illyrian tribes, always hostile to their Macedonian neighbors,
and of Attains, king of Pergamus. Philip was left at last with-
out a friend or ally, excepting Acarnania, which exhibited the
unusual spectacle of a grateful nation firmly adhering to its
benefactor in his adversity.

The terms of peace agreed to by Philip after the battle of
Cynocephalae were the following : — He was to evacuate all the
Greek cities which he held, whether in Europe or Asia, some
immediately, the others within a given time. He was to sur-
render his state-galley and all his navy except five light ships.
He was to restore all the Roman prisoners and deserters ; and
he was to pay to the Romans looo talents, 500 at once, the rest
in ten annual installments. He was also to abstain from all
aggressive war, and to surrender any claim to his revolted
province, Orestis. These terms, though hard, were as favor-
able as he had any right to expect. Had the yEtolians been
allowed to have their way, he would have been far more se-
verely treated.

The policy of Rome in proclaiming freedom to the Greeks,
and even withdrawing her garrisons from the great fortresses
of Demetrias, Chalcis, and Corinth — the " fetters of Greece "
— was undoubtedly sound. Greek freedom could not be main-
tained excepting under her protection ; and, by undertaking
the protectorate, she attached the bulk of the Greek people to
her cause. At the same time, the establishment of universal
freedom prevented any state from having much power; and
in the quarrels that were sure to ensue Rome would find her
advantage.

War broke out in Greece in the very year of Flamininus's
departure, B.C. 194, by the intrigues of the .^tolians, who en-
couraged Nabis to attack the Achaeans, then murdered Nabis,
and finally invited Antiochus over from Asia. The defeat of
Antiochus at Thermopylae, B.C. 191, left the ^tolians to bear
the brunt of the war which they had provoked, and after the
battle of Magnesia, B.C. 190, there was nothing left for them
but complete submission. Rome curtailed their territory, and
made them subject-allies, but forbore to crush them utterly,
since they might still be useful against Macedonia.

The degradation of .^Etolia was favorable to the growth and

ANCIENT HISTORY

225

advancement of the Achrean League, which at one and the
same time was patronized by Rome, and seemed to patriotic
Greeks the only remaining rallying-point for a national party.
The League at this time was under the guidance of the able
and honest Philopoemen, whose efforts for its extension were
crowned with remarkable success. After the murder of Nabis
by the i^tolians, Sparta was induced to join the League, B.C.
192; and, a year later, the last of the Peloponnesian states
which had remained separate, Messene and Elis, came in. The
League now reached its widest territorial extent, comprising
all the Peloponnese, together with Meg^ra and other places
beyond its limits.

After the conclusion of his peace with Rome, Philip for some
years remained quiet. But having assisted the Romans in their
struggle with Antiochus and the yEtolians, he was allowed to
extend his dominions by wars not only with Thrace, but also
with the Dolopians, Athamanians, and even the Thessalians
and Magnesians. When, however, his assistance was no
longer needed, Rome required him to g^ve up all his con-
quests and retire within the limit of Macedonia. Prolonged
negotiations followed, until at last (B.C. 183) the Senate was
induced to relax in their demands by the mediation of De-
metrius, Philip's second son, long a hostage at Rome, for
whom they professed to have a warm regard. The favor
openly shown towards this prince by the Roman government
was not perhaps intended to injure him ; but it naturally had
that result. It aroused the suspicion of his father and the jeal-
ousy of his elder brother, Perseus, and led to the series of ac-
cusations against the innocent youth, which at length induced
his father to consent to his death, B.C. 181. It may have been
remorse for his hasty act which brought Philip himself to the
grave within two years of his son's decease, at the age of fifty-
eight.

It is said that Philip had intended, on discovering the inno-
cence of Demetrius, and the guilt of his false accuser, Perseus,
to debar the latter from the succession. He brought forward
into public life a certain Antigonus, a nephew of Antigonus
Doson, and would, it is believed, have made him his heir, had
he not died both prematurely and suddenly. Antigonus be-

226 RAWLINSON

ing absent from the court, Perseus mounted the throne without
opposition ; but he took care to secure himself in its possession
by soon afterwards murdering his rival.

It had been the aim of Philip, ever since the battle of Cyno-
cephalse, and it continued to be the aim of Perseus, to maintain
the peace with Rome as long as might be feasible, but at the
same time to invigorate and strengthen Macedonia in every
possible way, and so to prepare her for a second struggle,
which it was hoped might terminate differently from the first.
Philip repopulated his exhausted provinces by transplantations
of Thracians and others, recruited his finances by careful work-
ing of the mineral treasures in which Macedonia abounded,
raised and disciplined a large military force, and entered into
alliances with several of the Northern nations, Illyrian, Celtic,
and perhaps even German, whom he hoped to launch against
Rome, when the proper time should arrive. Perseus, inherit-
ing this policy, pursued it diligently for eight years, allying
himself by intermarriages with Prusias of Bithynia and Seleu-
cus of Syria, winning to his cause Cotys the Odrysian, Gentius
the Illyrian, the Scordisci, the Bastarnse, and others. Even in
Greece he had a considerable party, who thought his yoke
would be more tolerable than that of Rome. Boeotia actually
entered into his alliance ; and the other states mostly wavered
and might have been won, had proper measures been taken.
But as the danger of a rupture drew near, Perseus's good
genius seemed to forsake him. He continued to pursue the
policy of procrastination long after the time had arrived for
vigorous and prompt action. He allowed Rome to crush his
friends in Greece without reaching out a hand to their assist-
ance. Above all, by a foolish and ill-timed niggardliness, he
lost the advantage of almost all the alliances which he had con-
tracted, disgusting and alienating his allies, one after another,
by the refusal of his subsidies which they required before set-
ting their troops in motion. He thus derived no benefit from
his well-filled treasury, which simply went to swell the Roman
gains at the end of the war.

The Romans landed in Epirus in the spring of B.C. 171, and
employed themselves for some months in detaching from Per-
seus his allies, and in putting down his party in the Greek

ANCIENT HISTORY 227

states. They dissolved the Boeotian League, secured the elec-
tion of their partisans in various places, and obtained promises
of aid from Achaea and Thessaly. Perseus allowed himself to
be entrapped into making a truce during these months, and the
Romans were thus able to complete their preparations at their
leisure. At lengfth, towards autumn, both armies took the
field — Perseus with 39,000 foot and 4000 horse, the Romans
with an equal number of horse, but with foot not much ex-
ceeding 30,000. In the first battle, which was fought in Thes-
saly, Perseus was victorious ; but he made no use of his victory,
except to sue for peace, which was denied him. The war then
languished for two years ; but in B.C. 168, the command being
taken by L. i^milius Paullus, Perseus was forced to an engage-
ment near Pydna (June 22), which decided the fate of the mon-
archy. The defeated prince fled to Samothrace, carrying with
him 6000 talents — a sum the judicious expenditure of which
might have turned the scale against the Romans. Here he
was shortly afterwards captured by the praetor Octavius, and,
being carried to Rome by the victorious consul, was led in
triumph, and within a few years killed by ill usage, about B.C.
166.

The conquered kingdom of Macedonia was not at once re-
duced into the form of a Roman province, but was divided up
into four distinct states, each of them, it would seem, a kind of
federal republic, which were expressly forbidden to have any
dealings one with another. Amphipolis, Thessalonica, Pella,
and Pelagonia were made the capitals of the four states. To
prevent any outburst of discontent at the loss of political status,
the burdens hitherto laid upon the people were lightened.
Rome was content to receive in tribute from the Macedonians
one-half the amount which they had been in the habit of pay-
ing to their kings.

In Greece, the immediate effect of the last Macedonian War
was the disappearance of four out of the five Federal Unions,
which had recently divided almost the whole of the Hellenic
soil among them. The allegiance of vEtolia had wavered dur-
ing the struggle ; and at its close the Romans either formally
dissolved the League, or made it simply municipal. Acar-
nania, which went over to Rome in the course of the war, was

228 RAWLINSON

nominally allowed to continue a confederacy, but practically
vanishes from Grecian history from this moment. Boeotia
having submitted, B.C. 171, was formally broken up into dis-
tinct cities. Epirus was punished for deserting the Roman
side by desolation and depopulation, the remnant of her people
being handed over to the rule of a tyrant. The only power
remaining in Greece which possessed at once some strength
and a remnant of independence, was Achaea, whose fidelity to
Rome during the whole course of the war made it impossible
even for the Roman Senate to proceed at once to treat her as
an enemy.

Achaea, nevertheless, was doomed from the moment that
Macedonia fell. The policy of Rome was at this time not
guided by a sense of honor, but wholly by a regard for her own
interests. Having crushed Macedonia and mastered all
Greece except Achaea, she required for the completion of her
work in this quarter that Achaea should either become wholly
submissive to her will, or be conquered. It was at once to test
the submissiveness of the Achaean people, and to obtain host-
ages for their continued good behavior, that Rome, in B.C.
167, required by her ambassadors the trial of above a thousand
of the chief Achaeans on the charge of having secretly aided
Perseus ; and, when the Achaean Assembly did not dare to re-
fuse, carried off to Italy the whole of the accused persons. All
the more moderate and independent of the Achaeans were thus
deported, and the strong partisans of Rome, Callicrates and
his friends, were left in sole possession of the government.
For seventeen years the accused persons were kept in prison in
Etruscan towns without a hearing. Then, when their number
had dwindled to three hundred, and their unjust detention had
so exasperated them that a rash and reckless policy might be
expected from their return to power, Rome suddenly released
the remnant and sent them back to their country.

The natural consequences followed. Power fell into the
hands of Diaeus, Critolaiis, and Damocritus, three of the exiles
who were most bitterly enraged against Rome ; and these per-
sons played into the hands of their hated enemies by exciting
troubles intended to annoy the Romans, but which really gave
them the pretext — which was exactly what they wanted — for

ANCIENT HISTORY 229

an armed interference. The rebellion of Andriscus, a pretended
son of Perseus, in Macedonia (B.C. 149 to 148), caused a brief
delay ; but in B.C. 146, four years after the return of the exiles,
war was actually declared. Metellus first, and then Mummius,
defeated the forces of the League; Critolaus fell in battle;
Diaeus slew himself ; Corinth, where the remnant of the Achae-
an army had taken refuge, was taken and sacked, and the last
faint spark of Grecian independence was extinguished. Achaea
was not, indeed, at once reduced into a province ; and, though
the League was formally dissolved, yet, after an interval, its
nominal revival was permitted ; but the substance of liberty had
vanished at the battle of Leucopetra, and the image of it which
Polybius was allowed to restore was a mere shadow, known by
both parties to be illusory. Before many years were past,
Achaea received, like the other provinces, her proconsul, and
became an integral part of the great empire against which she
had found it vain to attempt to struggle.

Part IV.

History of the Smaller States and Kingdoms formed out of the
Fragments of Alexander' s Monarchy.^

Besides the three main kingdoms of Syria, Egypt, and Mace-
donia, which were formed out of the g^eat empire of Alexander,
there arose in the East at this time, partly out of Alexander's
dominions, partly out of unconquered portions of the Persian
territory, a number of independent lesser states, mostly mon-
archies, which played an important part in Oriental history

* Sources. Besides most of the ancient writers mentioned above as
authorities for the history of the Syrian, Egyptian, and Macedonian
kingdoms, the following are of value: — The fragments of Memnon of
Heracleia Pontica, published in the " Fragmenta Historicorum Grae-
corum " of C. Miiller. Paris, 1849; vol. iii. The " Parthica " of Arrian,
contained in the " Bibliotheca " of Photius (ed. Bekkcr. Berolini. 1824;
2 vols. 4to). The great work of the Jewish historian Fl. Josephus.
entitled " Antiquitatum Judaicarum libri xx." (ed. K. E. Richtcr. Lip-
siae, 1825-7; 4 vols. 8vo). Ammianus Marcellinus, " Historia Ro-
mana" (ed. Wagner et Erfurdt. Lipsiae. 1808: 3 vols. 8vo). And.
especially for the Jewish history, the "Books of Maccabees."

230 RAWLINSON

during the decline of the Macedonian and the rise of the Ro-
man power, and of which therefore some account must be
given in a work hke the present. The principal of these were,
first, in Asia Minor, Pergamus, Bithynia, Paphlagonia, Pontus
and Cappadocia ; secondly, in the region adjoining, Greater
and Lesser Armenia ; thirdly, in the remoter East, Bactria and
Parthia ; and, fourthly, in the tract between Syria and Egypt,
Judasa.

Our information on the subject of these kingdoms is very
scanty. No ancient writer gives us any continuous or sep-
arate history of any of them. It is only so far as they become
implicated in the affairs of the greater kingdoms that they at-
tract the ancient writers' attention. Their history is thus very
incomplete, and sometimes quite fragmentary. Much, how-
ever, has been done towards making out a continuous nar-
rative, in some cases, by a skilful combination of scattered
notices, and a judicious use of the knowledge derived from
coins.

Kingdom of Pergamus.

In Western Asia the most important of the lesser kingdoms
was that of Pergamus, which arose in the course of the war
waged between Seleucus Nicator and Lysimachus. Small and
insignificant at its origin, this kingdom gradually grew into
power and importance by the combined military genius and
prudence of its princes, who had the skill to side always with
the stronger party. By assisting Syria against the revolted
satrap Achaeus, and Rome against Macedon and Syria, the
kings of Pergamus gradually enlarged their dominion, until
they were at length masters of fully half Asia Minor. At the
same time, they had the good taste to encourage art and
literature, and to render the capital of their kingdom a sort of
rival to Alexandria. They adorned Pergamus with noble
buildings, the remains of which may be seen at the present day.
They warmly fostered the kindred arts of painting and sculpt-
ure. To advance literature, they established an extensive
public library, and attracted to their capital a considerable
number of learned men. A grammatical and critical school
grew up at Pergamus only second to the Alexandrian ; and the

ANCIENT HISTORY 231

Egyptian papyrus was outdone, as a literary material, by the
charta Pergamcna (parchment).

The founder of the kingdom was a certain Philetaerus, a
eunuch, whom Lysimachus had made governor of the place
and guardian of his treasures. On the death of Lysimachus
at the battle of Corupedion, Philetaerus maintained possession
of the fortress on his own account, and, by a judicious employ-
ment of the wealth whereof he had become possessed, in the
hire of mercenaries and otherwise, he succeeded in establishing
his independence, and even in transmitting his principality and
treasure to his nephew, Eumenes, the son of Eumenes, his
brother.

Eumenes I., the successor of Philetaerus, was attacked, very
shortly after his succession, by Antiochus I., the son and suc-
cessor of Seleucus, but defeated him in a pitched battle near
Sardis, and obtained an increase of territory by his victory.
He reigned twenty-two years, and died from the effects of over-
drinking, B.C. 241, bequeathing Pergamus to his first cousin,
Attalus — the son of his father's brother, Attalus, by Antiochis,
the daughter of Achaeus.

Attalus I. distinguished himself early in his reign (about
B.C. 239) by a great victory over the Gauls, who had been now
for above thirty years settled in Northern Phrygfia (Galatia),
whence they made continual plundering raids upon their neigh-
bors. On obtaining this success, he for the first time assumed
the title of " king," having previously, like his two predeces-
sors, borne only that of " dynast." From this time we hear
nothing of him for the space of about ten years, when we find
him engaged in a war with Antiochus Hierax, the brother of
Seleucus CalHnicus, who was endeavoring to make himself
king of Asia Minor. Having defeated this ambitious prince,
and driven him out of Asia, Attalus succeeded in vastly en-
larging his own dominions, which, about B.C. 226, included
most of the countries west of the Halys and north of Taurus.
But the Syrian monarchs were not inclined to submit to this
loss of territory. First Seleucus Ceraunus (B.C. 226), and
then Antiochus the Great, by his general Achaeus (B.C. 223),
made war upon Attalus, and by the year B.C. 221 his con-
quests were all lost, and his dominions once more reduced to

232

RAWLINSON

the mere Pergamene principality. But in B.C. 218 the tide
again turned. By the help of Gallic mercenaries Attains re-
covered ^olis ; and two years later he made a treaty with An-
tiochus the Great against Achaeus, who had been driven into
revolt, which led to his receiving back from Antiochus, after
Achseus's defeat and death, B.C. 214, most of the territory
whereof he had been deprived seven years previously. Three
years after this, B.C. 211, by joining the ^tolians and Romans
against Philip, he laid the foundation of the latter prosperity of
his kingdom, which depended on its enjoying the favor and
patronage of Rome. In vain Philip, after peace had been
made, B.C. 204, turned upon Attains, invading and ravaging
his territory, and endeavoring to sweep his fleet from the sea.
Attains, in alliance with Rhodes, proved more than a match
for this antagonist; and the battle of Chios, B.C. 201, avenged
the desolation of Pergamus. In the second war between
Rome and Philip, B.C. 199, the Pergamene monarch, though
he was seventy years of age, took again an active part, sup-
porting the Romans with his fleet, and giving them very valu-
able aid. But the exertion proved too much for his physical
strength : he was seized with illness as he pleaded the cause of
Rome in an assembly of the Boeotians, B.C. 197, and, having
been conveyed to Pergamus, died there in the course of the
same year. He left behind him four sons by his wife Apol-
lonias, viz., Eumenes, Attains, Philetaerus, and Athenaeus.

Eumenes II., the eldest of the sons of Attains, succeeded him.
He was a prudent and warlike prince, the inheritor at once of
his father's talents and his policy. In the wars which Rome
waged with Philip, with Antiochus, and with Perseus, he threw
his weight on the Roman side, only on one occasion showing
some slight symptoms of wavering, when in B.C. 169 he held
some separate correspondence with Perseus. In return for the
aid which he furnished against Antiochus, Rome, after the bat-
tle of Magnesia, made over to him the greater part of the ter-
ritory whereof she had deprived the Syrian king. Not only
were Mysia, Lydia, Phrygia, Lycaonia, Pamphylia, and por-
tions of Caria and Lycia, acknowledged now by the authority
of Rome to be integral parts of the kingdom of Pergamus, but
even the Chersonese, with its capital Lysimacheia, and the ad-

ANCIENT HISTORY

233

jacent parts of Thrace, were attached to it. The Pergamcne
monarchy became in this way one of the greatest kingdoms of
the East ; and in the war which followed with Prusias of Bi-
thynia, B.C. 183, it was still further enlarged by the addition
of the Hellespontine Phrygia. In those waged with Phar-
naces of Pontus, B.C. 183 to 179, and with the Gauls, about
B.C. 168, it was, however, the object of Eumenes to maintain,
rather than to enlarge, his boundaries. Towards the close of
his long reign he seems to have become suspicious of the in-
creasing power of the Romans, and to have been inclined to
counteract their influence, so far as he dared. Hence the Ro-
mans distrusted him, and were disposed to support against him
his brother Attains, who was more thoroughly attached to their
interests. It was perhaps fortunate for Eumenes that he died
when he did : otherwise, he might have had to contend for the
possession of his kingdom with his own brother, supported by
all the power of Rome.

Though Eumenes left behind him a son, called Attalus, yet,
as this Attalus was a mere boy, the crown was assumed by his
uncle, Attalus, who took the surname of Philadelphus. Phila-
delphus reigned twenty-one years, from B.C. 159 to 138. In
the earlier part of his reign he was actively engaged in various
wars, restoring Ariarathes to his kingdom, about B.C. 157,
helping Alexander Bala against Demetrius, B.C. 152, assisting
the Romans to crush Andriscus, the pseudo-Philip, B.C. 149 to
148, and, above all, engaging in a prolonged contest with
Prusias II., who would undoubtedly have conquered him and
annexed Pergamus to Bithynia, if Attalus had not called in the
aid of Ariarathes of Cappadocia and Mithridates of Pontus,
and also that of the Romans. The threats of Rome forced
Prusias to abstain, and even to compensate Attalus for his
losses. Attalus, nevertheless, was glad when, B.C. 149, an op-
portunity offered itself of exchanging Prusias for a more peace-
ful and friendly neighbor. With this view he supported Nico-
medes in his rebellion against his father, and helped to establish
him in his kingdom. A quiet time followed, which Attalus de-
voted to the strengthening of his power by the building of new
cities, and to the encouragement of literature and art. Be-
coming infirm as he approached his eightieth year, he devolved

234 RAWLINSON

the cares of the government on his minister, Philopoemen, who
became the real ruler of the country. Finally, at the age of
eighty-two, Philadelphus died, leaving the crown to his
nephew and ward. Attains, the son of Eumenes II., who must
have been now about thirty years old.

Attains III., the son of Eumenes II., on ascending the throne
took the name of Philometor, in honor of his mother, Strato-
nice, the daughter of Ariarathes, king of Cappadocia. He
reigned five years only, from B.C. 138 to 133; yet into this
short space he crowded more crimes and odious actions than
are ascribed to all the other kings of his house put together.
He condemned to death without trial all the old counsellors
and friends of his father and uncle, and at the same time de-
stroyed their families. He then caused to be assassinated al-
most all those who held any office of trust in the kingdom.
Finally, he turned against his own relations, and even put to
death his mother, for whom he had professed a warm affection.
At length remorse seized him, and he abandoned the cares of
state, devoting himself to painting, sculpture, and gardening,
on which last subject he wrote a work. He died of a fever,
brought on, it is said, by a sun-stroke ; and, by a will as strange
as his conduct, left the Roman People his heir.

Rome readily accepted the legacy; but Aristonicus, a bas-
tard son of Eumenes II., boldly disputed the prize with them,
claiming the kingdom as his natural inheritance. He com-
pelled the cities to acknowledge him, which had at first refused
through fear of the Romans ; and when Licinius Crassus was
sent to take forcible possession of the country, Aristonicus de-
feated him, and took him prisoner, B.C. 131. In the year fol-
lowing, however, Aristonicus was himself defeated and made
prisoner by Peperna; and the kingdom of Pergamus became
shortly afterwards a Roman province.

Kingdom of Bithynia.

Though Bithynia was conquered by Croesus, and submitted
readily to Cyrus, when he absorbed the Lydian empire into
his own dominions, yet we find, somewhat early in the Persian
period, that the country is governed by native kings, who are

ANCIENT HISTORY 235

not unfrequently at war with the satraps of Asia Minor. The
first of these semi-independent monarchs is Dydalsus, who
must have been contemporary with the earUer part of the
Peloponnesian War. He was succeeded by Boteiras, probably
the opponent of Pharnabazus (about B.C. 400), who left the
crown to his son, Bas, B.C. 376. This king, the last under
the Persians, held the throne for the long term of fifty years,
and thus saw the commencement of the new state of things
under the Macedonians.

With the dissolution of the Persian empire, which Alexan-
der's conquests brought about, Bithynia acquired complete
independence. Bas successfully resisted the attempts which
Alexander made by his general Carantus (Caranus?) to re-
duce him, and at his death, in B.C. 326, he left to his son,
ZipcEtes, a flourishing and wholly autonomous kingdom.

Zipoetes, the son and successor of Bas, successfully main-
tained the independence, which he had inherited, against the
attacks of Lysimachus and Antiochus Soter, while he threat-
ened the Greek cities in his neighborhood, Heracleia Pontica,
Astacus, and Chalcedon. He reigned forty-eight years, from
B.C. 326 to B.C. 278, and left behind him four sons, Nico-
medes, Zipoetes, and two others.

It would seem that, at the death of Zipoetes, a dispute con-
cerning the succession arose between two of his sons. The
eldest of them, Nicomedes, finding himself in danger of losing
the kingdom to Zipoetes, his younger brother, invited the
Gauls to cross over from Europe to his assistance, and by their
aid defeated his brother and fully established his authority.
He repelled by the same aid an attack on his independence
made by Antiochus I. Nothing more is known of Nicomedes,
except that he founded Nicomedeia on the Gulf of Astacus,
and that he married two wives, Ditizele and Etazeta, by the
former of whom he had a single son, Zeilas, while by the latter
he had three children, Prusias, Tiboetes, and Lysandra, to
whom, for their mother's sake, he desired to leave his kingdom.

Zeilas, who was living as an exile in Armenia, having ob-
tained the services of a band of Gauls, entered Bithynia, and
established his authority by a war in which he frequently de-
feated the partisans of his half-brothers. Very little is known

236 RAWLINSON

of his history; but we may gather from some passages that
he carried on successful wars with Paphlagonia and Cappa-
docia, in both of which countries he founded cities. He reigned
about twenty years, and finally perished in an attempt which
he made to destroy by treachery a number of Gallic chiefs at
a banquet. He was succeeded by his son, Prusias.

Prusias I., known as " Prusias the Lame," ascended the
throne probably about B.C. 228, and held it at least forty-five
years. The earlier years of his reign were uneventful; but,
from about B.C. 220 nearly to his death, he was engaged in
a series of important wars, and brought into contact with some
of the chief powers of Asia and Europe. By his unceasing en-
ergy he extended his dominions in several directions, and
would have raised Bithynia into one of the most important of
the Asiatic kingdoms, had he not unfortunately given offence
to the Romans, first, by attacking their ally, Eumenes of Per-
gamus, and, secondly, by sheltering Hannibal. Not content
with extorting the consent of Prusias to the surrender of the
Carthaginian refugee, who was thereby driven to put an end
to his own life, Rome, under the threat of war, compelled the
Bithynian monarch to cede to Eumenes the whole of the Hel-
lespontine Phrygia. He compensated himself to some extent
by attacking Heracleia Pontica; but here he received the
wound from which he derived his surname of " the Lame,"
and shortly after this he died, leaving the crown to a son called,
like himself, Prusias.

Prusias H., the son and successor of Prusias L, was the most
wicked and contemptible of the Bithynian monarchs. Though
he had married, at his own request, the sister of the Macedo-
nian king, Perseus, yet, when that monarch was attacked by the
Romans, he lent him no aid, only venturing once, B.C. 169,
to intercede for his brother-in-law by an embassy. When vic-
tory declared itself on the Roman side, he made the most abject
submission, and thus obtained the assent of Rome to his reten-
tion of his kingdom. Like his father, he lived on bad terms
with Eumenes ; and, when that king died and was succeeded
by Attains H., he ventured to begin a war, B.C. 156, which
would certainly have been successful, had the Romans ab-
stained from interference. They, however, by threats induced

ANCIENT HISTORY 23^

Prusias to consent to a peace, by which he relinquished the
fruits of his victories, and even engaged to pay to Attalus the
sum of 500 talents. Meanwhile, he had alienated the affections
of his subjects by his cruellies and impieties, while Nicomedes,
his son, had conciliated their regard. Viewing, therefore, his
son as a rival, Prusias first sent him to Rome, and then gave
orders that he should be assassinated. But his emissary be-
trayed him ; and Nicomedes, learning his danger, with the con-
nivance of the Senate, quitted Rome and returned as a pre-
tender to his own country. There, being openly supported
by Attalus, and known to have the good wishes of the Romans,
he was received with general favor ; and, having besieged his
father in Nicomedeia, obtained possession of his person and
put him to death, B.C. 149.

Nicomedes II., who now mounted the throne, followed the
example of the Syrian and Egyptian kings in assuming the
title of " Epiphanes," or " Illustrious." He reigned fifty-eight
years, from B.C. 149 to 91, and took an active part in the wars
which at this time desolated Asia Minor. It was his object to
stand well with the Romans, and hence he willingly sent a con-
tingent to their aid when they warred with Aristonicus of Per-
gamus, B.C. 133 to 130, and, professedly at any rate, rendered
obedience to the various commands which they addressed to
him. Still he made several attempts, all of them more or less
displeasing to Rome, at increasing the power and extent of his
kingdom. In B.C. 102 he attacked Paphlagonia in combi-
nation with Mithridates the Great, and took possession of
a portion of it. Required by Rome to restore his conquest
to the legitimate heir, he handed it over to one of his own
sons, whom he pretended to be a Paphlagonian prince, and
made him take the name of Pylsemenes. Shortly afterwards,
B.C. 96, when Mithridates endeavored to annex Cappadocia,
and Laodice, the widow of the late king, fled to him, he mar-
ried her, and, warmly espousing her cause, established her as
queen in Cappadocia; whence, however, she was shortly ex-
pelled by Mithridates. Finally, in B.C. 93, after the deaths of
the two sons of Laodice, he brought ioTyfzrd an impostor, who
claimed to be also her son, and endeavored to obtain for him
the crown of Cappadocia. Here, however, he overreached

238 RAWLINSON

himself. The imposture was detected; and Rome not only
refused to admit the title of his protege to the Cappadocian
crown, but required him likewise to abandon possession of
Paphlagonia, which was to be restored to independence. Soon
after this, the long reign of Nicomedes II. came to an end.
His age at his decease cannot have been much less than eighty.
Nicomedes II. left behind him two sons, Nicomedes and
Socrates, who was surnamed " the Good " (Xpj/a-To?). Nico-
medes, who was the elder of the two, succeeded, and is known as
Nicomedes III. He took the titles of " Epiphanes " and " Phil-
opator." Scarcely was he seated on the throne when, at the
instigation of Mithridates, his brother Socrates, accusing him
of illegitimacy, claimed the kingdom, and, with the aid of an
army which Mithridates furnished, drove Nicomedes out, and
assumed the crown. Rome, however, in the next year, B.C. 90,
by a simple decree reinstated Nicomedes, who proceeded, in
B.C. 89, to retaliate upon Mithridates by plundering incursions
into his territories. Thus provoked, Mithridates, in B.C. 88,
collected a vast army, defeated Nicomedes on the Amneius,
and drove him with his Roman allies out of Asia. The first
Mithridatic War followed ; and at its close, in B.C. 84, Nico-
medes was restored to his kingdom for the second time, and had
a tranquil reign after this for the space of ten years. Dying
without issue, in B.C. 74, he left by will his kingdom to the
Romans — a legacy which brought about the third and greatest
" Mithridatic War."

Kingdom of Paphlagonia.

Like Bithynia, Paphlagonia became semi-independent under
the Achaemenian monarchs. As early as B.C. 400, the rulers
of the country are said to have paid very little regard to the
Great King's orders; and in B.C. 394 we find the monarch,
Cotys, allying himself with Agesilaus against Persia. Thirty
or forty years later another king is mentioned as reduced by
the Persian satrap, Datames. On the dissolution of the Persian
empire, Paphlagonia was attached to his dominions by Mithri-
dates of Pontus, and it continued for a considerable time to be
a portion of the Pontic kingdom.

ANCIENT HISTORY

239

The circumstances under which, and the time when, Paphla-
gonia regained its independence, are unknown to us ; but, soon
after B.C. 200, we find the throne once more occupied by native
monarchs, who are entangled in the wars of the period. These
princes have a difficulty in maintaining themselves against the
monarchs of Pontus on the one hand, and those of Bithynia on
the other ; but they nevertheless hold the throne till B.C. 102,
when, the last native king, Pylaemenes I., dying without issue,
Mithridates the Great and Nicomedes II. conjointly seize the
country, and the latter establishes on the throne one of his own
sons, who rules for about eight years, when Mithridates expels
him and takes possession of the whole territory.

Kingdom of Pontus.

The satrapy of Cappadocia appears to have been conferred
by Darius Hystaspis as an hereditary fief on Otanes, one of
the seven conspirators, who was descended from the ancient
Arian kings of Cappadocia. It continued to form a single prov-
ince of the empire, and to be governed by satraps descended
from Otanes, till the year B.C. 363, when Ariobarzanes, the
son of the Mithridates who was satrap in the time of Xeno-
phon, rebelled, and made himself king of the portion of Cappa-
docia which lay along the coast, and which was thence called
" Pontus " by the Greeks. Inland Cappadocia continued to
be a province of Persia. Ariobarzanes reigned twenty-six
years, from B.C. 363 to 337, when he was succeeded by his son,
Mithridates I. (commonly called Mithridates II.), who held the
kingdom at the time of the Macedonian invasion.

Mithridates I., who ascended the throne B.C. 337, seems to
have remained neutral during the contest between Darius
Codomannus and Alexander. On the reduction of Cappadocia
by Perdiccas, B.C. 322, he was, however, compelled to submit
to the Macedonians, after which he enjoyed for a time the favor
of Antigonus and helped him in his wars. But Antigonus,
growing jealous of him, basely plotted his death ; whereupon
he returned to Pontus and resumed a separate sovereignty,
about B.C. 318. In B.C. 317 fie supported Eumenes against
Antigonus ; and in B.C. 302 he was about to join the league

240 RAWLINSON

of the satraps against the same monarch, when Antigonus,
suspecting his intention, caused him to be assassinated.

Mithridates II., the son of Mithridates I., succeeded. He
added considerably to his hereditary dominions by the acquisi-
tion of parts of Cappadocia and Paphlagonia, and even vent-
ured to conclude an alliance with the Greeks of Heracleia
Pontica, B.C. 281, whom he undertook to defend against
Seleucus. According to Diodorus, he reigned thirty-six years,
from B.C. 302 to 266. He left the crown to his son, Ario-
barzanes.

Ariobarzanes IL, who appears to have reigned about twenty-
one years, from B.C. 266 to 245, did little to distinguish him-
self. He repulsed an attack of Ptolemy (Euergetes?) by the
assistance of the Gauls, but afterwards quarrelled with that
fickle people, whose close neighborhood was very injurious to
his kingdom. He also obtained possession of the town of
Amastris upon the Euxine, which was surrendered to him by
Eumenes, its dynast. On his death he was succeeded by his
son, Mithridates, who was a minor.

Mithridates III., the most distinguished of the earlier Pontic
monarchs, made it his object to strengthen and augment his
kingdom by alliances with the other monarchs and princes of
Asia, rather than by warfare. As soon as he had attained to
manhood, he married a sister of Seleucus Callinicus, with whom
he received the province of Phrygia as a dowry. In B.C. 222,
he gave his daughter, Laodice, in marriage to Antiochus the
Great, the son of Callinicus, and at the same time married an-
other daughter, called also Laodice, to Achseus, the cousin of
Antiochus. He did not allow these connections, however, to
fetter his political action. In the war between Seleucus Cal-
linicus and Antiochus Hierax, he sided with the latter, and on
one occasion he inflicted a most severe defeat upon his brother-
in-law, who lost 20,000 men. In B.C. 220, he turned his arms
against the Greeks of Sinope, but this town, which was assisted
by the Rhodians, appears to have maintained itself against his
efforts. It is uncertain how long Mithridates III. reigned,
but the conjecture is reasonable that he died about B.C. 190.

He was succeeded on the throne by his son, Pharnaces, who
conquered Sinope, and made it the royal residence, about B.C.

ANCIENT HISTORY 241

183. This king soon afterwards involved himself in a war with
Eumenes of Pergamus, of whose greatly augmented power
he had naturally become jealous. Rome endeavored to hinder
hostilities from breaking out, but in B.C. 181 Phamaces took
the field, overran Paphlagonia, expelling the king, Morzes or
Morzias, and poured his troops into Cappadocia and Galatia.
At first, he met with considerable success; but after a while
the tide turned, and in B.C. 179 he was glad to make peace on
condition of giving up all his conquests except the town of
Sinope. After this we hear nothing more of him ; but he seems
to have lived some considerable time longer, probably till
about B.C. 160.

Phamaces I. was succeeded by his son, Mithridates, who
took the name of " Euergetes," and reigned about forty years,
from near B.C. 160 to 120. He entered into alliance with At-
tains II., king of Pergamus, and lent him important assistance
in his wars with Prusias II. of Bithynia, B.C. 154. A few years
later he made alliance with Rome, and sent a contingent to
bear a part in the Third Punic War, B.C. 150 to 146. He like-
wise assisted Rome in the war against Aristonicus, B.C. 131,
and at its close received the Greater Phryg^a as the reward of
his services. His end was tragical. About B.C. 120, his own
immediate attendants conspired against him, and assassinated
him at Sinope, where he held his court.

Mithridates, the elder of his two sons, succeeded, and took
the title of " Eupator," for which, however, modem historians
have generally substituted the more high-sounding epithet of
" the Great." He was undoubtedly the most able of all the
Pontic kings, and will bear comparison with any of the Asiatic
monarchs since Darius Hystaspis. Ascending the throne
while he was still a minor, and intrusted to guardians whom he
suspected, it was not till about B.C. 112 that he could under-
take any important enterprise. But the interval of about eight
years was well employed in the training of his own mind and
body — the former by the study of languages, whereof he is
said to have spoken twenty-five ; the latter by perpetual hunt-
ing expeditions in the roughest and most remote regions. On
reaching the age of twenty, and assuming the conduct of af-
fairs, he seems to have realized at once the danger of his posi-
16

242 RAWLINSON

tion as ruler of a petty kingdom, which must, by its position
upon her borders, be almost immediately attacked by Rome,
and could not be expected to make any effectual resistance.
Already, during his minority, the grasping republic had seized
his province of Phrygia ; and this was felt to be merely a fore-
taste of the indignities and injuries with which, so long as he
was weak, he would have to put up. Mithridates therefore
determined, not unwisely, to seek to strengthen his kingdom,
and to raise it into a condition in which it might be a match for
Rome. With this object, in B.C. 112, he boldly started forth
on a career of Eastern conquest. Here Rome could not inter-
fere with him ; and in the space of about seven years he had
added to his dominions the Lesser Armenia, Uolchis, the entire
eastern coast of the Black Sea, the Chersonesus Taurica, or
kingdom of the Bosporus (the modern Crimea), and even the
whole tract westward from that point to the Tyras, or Dniester.
Having thus enlarged his dominions, and having further
strengthened himself by alliances with the wild tribes on the
Danube, Getse, Sarmatse, and others, whom he hoped one day
to launch upon Italy, he returned to Asia Minor, and com-
menced a series of intrigues and intermarriages, calculated to
give him greater power in this quarter.

Although it must have been evident, both to the Romans and
to Mithridates, that peace between them could not be main-
tained much longer, yet neither party was as yet prepared for
an actual rupture. The hands of Rome were tied by the con-
dition of Italy, where the " Social War " impended ; and Mith-
ridates regarded it as prudent to temporize a little longer. He
therefore submitted, in B.C. 92, to the decree of the Roman
Senate, which assigned Cappadocia to a native monarch, Ario-
barzanes, and in B.C. 90 to another decree which reinstated
Nicomedes on the throne of Bithynia. When, however, in the
following year, Nicomedes, encouraged by the Romans, pro-
ceeded to invade the Pontic kingdom, and the demand which
Mithridates made for redress produced no result, it seemed to
him that the time was come when he must change his policy,
and, laying aside all pretence of friendliness, commence the
actual struggle.

The disasters suffered by Mithridates in the Roman War

ANCIENT HISTORY ,43

encouraged the nations which he had subjected in the East
to revolt. The kingdom of the Bosporus threw off its alle-
giance, the Colchians rebelled, and other nations in the same
quarter showed symptoms of disaffection. Mithridates pro-
ceeded to collect a large fleet and army for the reduction of
the rebels, when his enterprise had to be relinquished on ac-
count of a second and wholly unprovoked Roman War. Mu-
rena, the Roman commander in Asia, suddenly attacked him,
almost without a pretext, B.C. 83 ; and it was not till the close
of the following year that peace was re-established.

The conclusion of the Second Roman War allowed Mithri-
dates to complete the reduction of his revolted subjects, which
he accomplished without much difficulty between the years
B.C. 81 and 74. He suffered, however, during this interval,
some heavy losses in an attempt which he made to subdue the
Achaeans of the Caucasus. But it was not so much in wars
as in preparations for war that the Pontic monarch employed
the breathing-space allowed him by the Romans after the fail-
ure of the attack of Murena. Vast efforts were made by him
to collect and discipline a formidable army ; troops were gath-
ered from all quarters, even from the banks of the Danube ; the
Roman arms and training were adopted ; fresh alliances were
concluded or attempted ; the fleet was raised to the number of
400 triremes; nothing was left undone that care or energy
could accomplish towards the construction of a power which
might fairly hope to hold its own when the time for a final trial
of strength with Rome should arrive.

The armed truce might have continued some years longer,
for Mithridates still hoped to increase his power, and Rome was
occupied by the war in Spain against the rebel Sertorius, had
not the death of Nicomedes III., king of Bithynia, in B.C. 74,
brought about a crisis. That monarch, having no issue, fol-
lowed the example of Attains, king of Pergamus, in leaving his
dominions by will to the Roman people. Had Mithridates
allowed Rome to take possession, the Pontic kingdom would
have been laid open to attack along the whole of its western
border; Rome would have been brought within five days*
march of Sinope ; and thus the position of Pontus, when war
broke out, would have been greatly weakened. Mithridates

244

RAWLINSON

therefore resolved to seize Bithynia before Rome could occupy
it. But this act was equivalent to a declaration of war, since
the honor of the great republic could not allow of her tamely
submitting to the seizure of what she regarded as her own
property.

The Third War of Mithridates with Rome, which broke out
in B.C. 74, was protracted to B.C. 65, and thus lasted nearly
nine years. The scene of the war was Asia. Its result was
scarcely doubtful from the first, for the Asiatic levies of Mith-
ridates, though armed after the Roman fashion and disciplined
to a certain extent, were no match for the trained veterans of
the Roman legions. The protraction of the war was owing,
in the first place, to the genius and energy of the Pontic mon-
arch, who created army after army, and who gradually learnt
the wisdom of avoiding pitched battles, and wasting the power
of the enemy by cutting off his supplies, falling on his detach-
ments, entangling him in difficult ground, and otherwise har-
assing and annoying him. It was further owing to the par-
ticipation in it of a new foe, Tigranes, who brought to the aid
of his neighbor and connection a force exceeding his own,
and very considerable resources. Rome was barely capable
of contending at one and the same time with two such king-
doms as those of Pontus and Armenia ; and up to the close of
B.C. 67, though her generals had gained many signal victories,
she had made no great impression on either of her two adver-
saries. The war, if conducted without any change of plan,
might still have continued for another decade of years, before
the power of resistance possessed by the two kings would have
been exhausted. But the genius of Pompey devised a scheme
by which an immediate and decisive result was made attain-
able. His treaty with Phraates, king of Parthia, brought a new
power into the field — a power fully capable of turning the bal-
ance in favor of the side whereto it attached itself. The atti-
tude of Phraates at the opening of the campaign of B.C. 66
paralyzed Tigranes ; and the Pontic monarch, deprived of the
succors on which he had hitherto greatly depended, though he
still resisted, and even fought a battle against his new antago-
nist, was completely and manifestly overmatched. Defeated
near the Armenian border by the Romans under Pompey, and

ANCIENT HISTORY 245

forbidden to seek a refuge in Armenia by his timid and sus-
picious brother-in-law, he had no choice but to yield his home
dominions to the victor, and to retire to those remote terri-
tories of which he had become possessed by conquest. Even
Pompey shrank from following his beaten foe into these inhos-
pitable regions, and with the passage of Mithridates across the
river Phasis, his third war with Rome came to an end.

Mithridates, in B.C. 65, retreated from Dioscurias to Pan-
ticapaeum, and established himself in the old kingdom of the
Bosporus. Such a principality was, however, too narrow for
his ambition. Having vainly attempted to come to terms with
Pompey, he formed the wild design of renewing the struggle
with Rome by attacking her in a new quarter. It was his in-
tention to proceed westward round the European side of the
Black Sea, and to throw himself upon the Roman frontier, per-
haps even to march upon Italy. But neither his soldiers nor his
near relatives were willing to embark in so wild a project. Its
announcement caused general disaffection, which at last ended
in conspiracy. His own son, Pharnaces, headed the malcon-
tents ; and the aged monarch, finding no support in any quar-
ter, caused himself to be despatched by one of his guards,
B.C. 63. The bulk of Pontus became a Roman province,
though a portion continued till the time of Nero to be ruled by
princes belonging to the old royal stock.

Kingdom of Cappadocia.

After the division of the Cappadocian satrapy into two prov-
inces, a northern and a southern, the latter continued subject
to Persia, the government being, however, hereditary in a
branch of the same family which had made itself independent
in the northern province. The Datames and Ariamnes of
Diodorus held this position, and are not to be regarded as
independent kings. It was only when the successes of Alex-
ander loosed the bands which held the Persian empire together
(B.C. 331) that the satrap, Ariarathes, the son of Ariamnes,
assumed the airs of independence, and, resisting the attack of
Perdiccas, was by him defeated, made a prisoner, and crucified,
B.C. 322.

246 RAWLINSON

Perdiccas, having subjected Cappadocia, made over his con-
quest to Eumenes, who continued, nominally at any rate, its
ruler until his death in B.C. 316. Cappadocia then revolted
under Ariarathes II., the nephew of Ariarathes I., who de-
feated and slew the Macedonian general, Amyntas, expelled
the foreign garrisons, and re-established the independence of
his country. No attempt seems to have been made to dis-
possess him either by Antigonus or Seleucus ; and Ariarathes
left his crown to the eldest of his sons, Ariamnes, probably
about B.C. 280.

The next two kings, Ariamnes, and his son, Ariarathes III.,
are little heard of in history: they appear to have reigned
quietly but ingloriously. A friendly connection between the
royal houses of Cappadocia and Syria was established in the
reign of the former, who obtained as a wife for his much-
loved son, Stratonice, the daughter of Antiochus Theus. The
two reigns of Ariamnes and Ariarathes III. appear to have
covered a space of about sixty years, from B.C. 280 to 220.
Ariarathes III. left the crown to a son, bearing the same name,
who was at the time of his father's death an infant.

The reign of Ariarathes IV. is remarkable as being that
which ended the comparative isolation of Cappadocia, and
brought the kingdom into close relation with the other mon-
archies of Asia Minor, and not only with them, but also with
the great republic of the West. The history of Cappadocia is
henceforth inextricably intermixed with that of the other king-
doms of Western Asia, and has been to a great extent antici-
pated in what has been said of them. Ariarathes IV., who was
the first cousin of Antiochus the Great, married in B.C. 192 his
daughter Antiochis, and, being thus doubly connected with the
Seleucid family, entered into close alliance with the Syrian
king, assisted him in his war against Rome, and bore his part
in the great battle of Magnesia by which the power of the Syr-
ian empire was broken, B.C. 190. Having thus incurred the
hostility of the Romans, and at the same time become sensible
of the greatness of their power, Ariarathes proceeded, in B.C.
188, to deprecate their wrath, and by an alliance with the
Roman protege, Eumenes, which was cemented by a marriage,
succeeded in appeasing the offended republic and obtained

ANCIENT HISTORY 247

favorable terms. Ariarathes then assisted Eumenes in his war
with Phamaces of Pontus, B.C. 183 to 179, after which he was
engaged in a prolonged quarrel with the Gauls of Galatia, who
wished to annex a portion of his territory. He continued on
the most friendly terms with Rome from the conclusion of
peace in B.C. 188 till his death in the winter of B.C. 163-2.
His reign lasted fifty-eight years.

Ariarathes V., sumamed " Philopator " from the aflfection
which he bore his father, maintained the alliance between Cap-
padocia and Rome with great fidelity. Solicited by Demetrius
Soter to enter into alliance with him and to connect his fam-
ily with that of the Seleucidae once more by a marriage, he de-
clined out of regard for Rome. Angered by his refusal, Deme-
trius set up against him the pretender, Orophernes, B.C. 158,
and for a time deprived him of his kingdom. The Romans,
however, with the help of Attains II., restored him in the year
following. After this Ariarathes lent Attains important aid
in his war with Prusias of Bithynia, B.C. 156 to 154, and when
Aristonicus attempted to resist the Roman occupation of that
province, B.C. 133, he joined the Romans in person, and lost
his life in their cause, B.C. 131.

Ariarathes V. seems to have left behind him as many as six
sons, none of whom, however, had reached maturity. Lao-
dice, therefore, the queen-mother, became regent ; and, being
an ambitious and unscrupulous woman, she contrived to poison
five out of her six sons before they were of age to reign, and
so kept the government in her own hands. One, the youngest,
was preserved, like the Jewish king, Joash, by his near rela-
tives ; and, after the death of Laodice, who fell a victim to the
popular indignation, he ascended the throne under the name
of Ariarathes VI. Little is known of this king, except that he
made alliance with Mithridates the Great, and married a sister
of that monarch, named also Laodice, about B.C. 115. By
her he had two sons, both named Ariarathes. He was mur-
dered by an emissary of Mithridates, B.C. 96, when his sons
were just growing into men.

On the removal of Ariarathes VI. his dominions were seized
by his brother-in-law, Mithridates, who designed to assume
the rule of them himself ; but Laodice, the widow of the late

248 RAWLINSON

king, having called in the aid of Nicomedes II., king of Bithy-
nia, whom she married, Mithridates, in order to retain his hold
on Cappadocia, found it necessary to allow the country its own
monarch, and accordingly set up as king, B.C. 96 or 95, Ari-
arathes VII., elder son of Ariarathes VI., and consequently the
legitimate monarch. This prince, however, showing himself
too independent, Mithridates, in B.C. 94, invited him to a con-
ference and slew him ; after which he placed on the throne a
son of his own, aged eight years, whose name he changed to
Ariarathes. But the Cappadocians rose in rebellion against
this attempt, and raised to the throne another Ariarathes, the
son of Ariarathes VI., and the younger brother of Ariarathes
VII., who endeavored to establish himself, but was driven out
by Mithridates and died shortly afterwards. By the death of
this prince the old royal family of Cappadocia became extinct ;
and though pretenders to the throne, claiming a royal descent,
were put forward both by Mithridates and Nicomedes, yet,
as the nullity of these claims was patent, Rome permitted the
Cappadocians to choose themselves a new sovereign, which
they did in B.C. 93, when Ariobarzanes was proclaimed king.

Ariobarzanes had scarcely ascended the throne when he
was expelled by Tigranes, king of Armenia, and forced to fly
to Rome for protection. The Romans reinstated him in the
next year, B.C. 92; and he reigned in peace for four years,
B.C. 92 to 88, when he was again ejected, this time by Mith-
ridates, who seized his territories, and retained possession of
them during the whole of his first war with the Romans. At
the peace, made in B.C. 84, Ariobarzanes was once more re-
stored. He now continued undisturbed till B.C. 67, when
Mithridates and Tigranes in combination drove him from his
kingdom for the third time, after which, in B.C. 66, he received
his third restoration at the hands of Pompey. About two years
later he abdicated in favor of his son, Ariobarzanes.

Ariobarzanes II., the friend of Cicero, began to reign prob-
ably in B.C. 64. He took the titles of " Eusebes " (the Pious)
and " Philorhomaeus " (lover of the Romans), and appears to
have aimed steadily at deserving the latter appellation. It was
difBcult, however, to please all parties in the civil wars. Ario-
barzanes sided with Pompey against Caesar, and owed it to the

ANCIENT HISTORY 249

magnanimity of the latter that he was not deprived of his king-
dom after PharsaUa, but forgiven and allowed an increase of
territory. In the next civil war he was less fortunate. Having
ventured to oppose the " Liberators," he was seized and put
to death by Cassius, B.C. 42, after he had reigned between
twenty-one and twenty-two years.

After Philippi, Antony conferred the crown of Cappadocia
on Ariarathes IX., the son (apparently) of the last king. It was
not long, however, before this prince lost his favor, and, in B.C.
36, he was put to death by Antony's orders, who wanted his
throne for Archelaiis, one of his creatures. Archelaiis, the
grandson of Mithridates's general of the same name, ruled
Cappadocia from B.C. 36 to A.D. 15, when he was summoned
to Rome by Tiberius, who had been oiTended by the circum-
stance that Archelaiis paid him no attention when he was in
voluntary exile at Rhodes. Archelaiis in vain endeavored to
excuse himself: he was retained at Rome by the tyrant, and
died there, either of a disease, or possibly by his own hand,
about A.D. 17. His kingdom was then reduced into the form
of a Roman province.

Kingdom of the Greater Armenia.

Armenia, which, from the date of the battle of Ipsus, B.C.
301, formed a portion of the empire of the Seleucidae, revolted
on the defeat of Antiochus the Great by the Romans, B.C. 190,
and became split up into two kingdoms, Armenia Major and
Armenia Minor, the latter lying on the west bank of the Eu-
phrates. The first king of Armenia Major was Artaxias, who
had been a general of Antiochus. He built Artaxata, the cap-
ital, and reigned probably about twenty-five years, when he
was attacked, defeated, and made prisoner by Antiochus
Epiphanes, about B.C. 165, who recovered Armenia to the
Syrian empire. How long the subjection continued is uncer-
tain ; but about B.C. 100 we find an Armenian king mentioned,
who seems to be independent, and who carries on war with the
Parthian monarch, Mithridates. This king, who is called by
Justin Ortoadistes, appears to have been succeeded, B.C. 96,
by the greatest of the Armenian monarchs, Tig^nes I., who

250

RAWLINSON

took the part already described in the great war between Mith-
ridates of Pontus and the Romans.

Tigranes I., who was a descendant of Artaxias, raised Ar-
menia from the condition of a petty kingdom to a powerful
and extensive empire. Compelled in his early years to pur-
chase a peace of the Parthians by a cession of territory, he soon
afterwards, about B.C. 90 to 87, not only recovered his prov-
inces, but added to his dominions the important countries of
Atropatene, and Gordyene (or Upper Mesopotamia), chastis-
ing the Parthian monarch on his own soil, and gaining for him-
self a great reputation. He then determined to attack the
Syrian kingdom, which was verging to its fall under Philip,
son of Grypus. Having crossed the Euphrates, he easily made
himself master of the entire Syrian territory, including the
province of Cilicia ; and for fourteen years, B.C. 83 to 69, his
dominions reached across the whole of Western Asia, from
the borders of Pamphylia to the shores of the Caspian. It was
during these years that he founded his great capital of Tigrano-
certa, and gave grievous offense to Rome by his conduct
towards her protege, Ariobarzanes of Cappadocia, whose terri-
tory he ravaged, B.C. 75, carrying off more than 300,000
people. Soon afterwards he added to the offense by receiving
and supporting Mithridates, and thus he drew the Roman arms
upon himself and his kingdom.

The result of the war with Rome was the loss by Tigranes
of all his conquests. He retained merely his original kingdom
of the Greater Armenia. The fidelity, however, which he
showed towards Pompey led to the enlargement of his domin-
ions, B.C. 65, by the addition of Gordyene; and the Roman
alliance was otherwise serviceable to him in the war which he
continued to wage with Parthia. He appears to have died
about B.C. 55, eleven years after the conclusion of his peace
with Rome, and one year before the expedition of Crassus.

Tigranes was succeeded by his son, Artavasdes I., who be-
gan his reign by following out the later policy of his father,
and endeavoring to keep on good terms with the Romans.
He bore a part in the great expedition of Crassus against the
Parthians, B.C. 54 ; and it was only when Orodes, the Parthian
king, advanced against him, and he was unable to obtain any

ANCIENT HISTORY 251

assistance from Rome, that he consented to a Parthian alliance,
and gave his daughter in marriage to Orodes's son, Pacorus.
This led him, when Pacorus invaded Syria, B.C. 51, to take up
an attitude of hostility to the Romans. But, at a later date,
when Antony threatened the Parthians, B.C. 36, he again es-
poused the Roman side, and took part in that general's ex-
pedition into Media Atropatene, which turned out unfortu-
nately. Antony attributed his repulse to Artavasdes deserting
him in his difficulties, and therefore invaded his country, in
B.C. 34, obtained possession of his person, and carried him into
captivity. Cleopatra afterwards, B.C. 30, put Artavasdes to
death.

On the captivity of Artavasdes, the Armenians conferred the
royal dignity on Artaxias II., his son. At first the Romans,
in conjunction with Artavasdes of Atropatene, drove him out ;
but during the struggle between Octavius and Antony he re-
turned, defeated the Atropatenian monarch, and took him pris-
oner. At the same time, he gave command for a massacre of
all the Romans in Armenia, which accordingly took place. He
reigned from B.C. 34 to 19, when he was murdered by his re-
lations.

The Romans now brought forward a candidate for the throne
in the person of Tigranes, the brother of Artaxias II., who was
installed in his kingdom by Tiberius at the command of Au-
gustus, and ruled the country as Tigranes II. From this time
Armenian independence was really at an end. The titular
monarchs were mere puppets, maintained in their position by
the Roman emperors or the Parthian kings, who alternately
exercised a prepondering influence over the country. At
length Armenia was made into a Roman province by Trajan,
B.C. 114.

Kingdom of Armenia Minor.

The kingdom of Armenia Minor was founded by Zariadras,
a general of Antiochus the Great, about the same time that
Artaxias founded the kingdom of Armenia Major, i.e., about
B.C. 190. It continued a separate state, governed by the de-
scendants of the founder, till the time of Mithridates of Pontus,
when it was annexed to his dominions by that ambitious prince.

252 RAWLINSON

Subsequently it fell almost wholly under the power of the Ro-
mans, and was generally attached to one or other of the neigh-
boring kingdoms, until the reign of Vespasian, when it was
converted into a Roman province. The names of the early
kings after Zariadras are unknown. Among the later were a
Cotys, contemporary with Caligula, A.D. 47, and an Aristobu-
lus, contemporary with Nero, A.D. 54. The latter prince be-
longed to the family of the Herods.

Kingdom of Bactria.

The Bactrian satrapy was for some time after the death of
Alexander only nominally subject to any of the so-called " Suc-
cessors." But, about B.C. 305, Seleucus Nicator in his Orien-
tal expedition received the submission of the governor; and
from that date till the reign of his grandson, Antiochus Theus,
Bactria continued to be a province of the Syrian empire. Then,
however, the personal character of Antiochus Theus, and his
entanglement in a war with Ptolemy Philadelphus, which taxed
his powers to the utmost, encouraged the remoter provinces to
revolt; and about B.C. 255 Diodotus, satrap of Bactria, de-
clared himself independent, and became the founder of the
Bactrian kingdom.

Little is known of Diodotus I. beyond the date of his acces-
sion, and the fact of the continuance of his reign from about
B.C. 255 to 237. It is possible that about B.C. 244 he (nom-
inally at any rate) submitted to Ptolemy Euergetes ; and prob-
able that when Seleucus Callinicus made his first attack on
Parthia, Diodotus lent him assistance, and obtained in return
an acknowledgment of his independence. He appears to have
died during the expedition of Callinicus, which is assigned
probably to the year B.C. 237. At his death he left the crown
to a son of the same name.

Diodotus II., who succeeded Diodotus I. about B.C. 237,
pursued a policy quite different from that of his father. In-
stead of lending aid to Callinicus, he concluded a treaty with
Arsaces II. (Tiridates), the Parthian king, and probably assist-
ed him in the great battle by which Parthian independence was
regarded as finally established. Nothing more is known of

ANCIENT HISTORY 253

this king ; nor can it even be determined whether it was he or
his son who was removed by Euthydemus, when that prince
seized the crown, about B.C. 222.

Euthydemus, the third known Bactrian king, was a Greek
of Magnesia, in Asia Minor. The circumstances under which
he seized the crown are unknown to us ; but it appears that he
had been king for some considerable time when Antiochus the
Great, having made peace with Arsaces, the third Parthian
monarch, turned his arms against Bactria with the view of re-
ducing it to subjection. In a battle fought on the Arius (Heri-
Rud), Euthydemus was defeated ; but Antiochus, who received
a wound in the engagement, shortly after granted him terms,
promised to give one of his daughters in marriage to Demetri-
us, Euthydemus's son, and left him in quiet possession of his
dominions, B.C. 206. The Indian conquests of Demetrius
seem to have commenced soon afterwards, while his father was
still living. They were on the south side of the Paropamisus,
in the modern Candahar and Cabul.

Demetrius, who is proved by his coins to have been king of
Bactria, no doubt succeeded his father. He engaged in an im-
portant series of conquests — partly as crown prince, partly as
king — on the southern side of the Paropamisus, which extend-
ed probably over the greater portion of Afghanistan, and may
even have embraced some districts of the Punjab region. The
city of Demetrias in Arachosia, and that of Euthydemeia on
the Hydaspes, are with reason regarded as traces of these con-
quests. While Demetrius was thus employed, a rebel named
Eucratides seems to have supplanted him at home; and the
reigns of these monarchs were for some time parallel, De-
metrius ruling on the south and Eucratides on the north side
of the mountain.*

After the death of Demetrius, Eucratides appears to have
reigned over both kingdoms. He was a monarch of consid-
erable vigor and activity, and pushed his conquests deep into
the Punjab region. He lost, however, a portion of his home
territory to the Parthian princes. On his return from an

* The dates for the accession and death of Demetrius are exceed-
ingly doubtful. The best authorities assign him, conjccturally, the space
from about B.C. 200 to 180.

254 RAWLINSON

Indian expedition he was waylaid and slain by his own son,
whom he had previously associated in the kingdom. His
reign must have lasted from about B.C. i8o to i6o.

The son of Eucratides, who after his murder became sole
monarch of Bactria, appears to have been a certain Heliocles,
who took the title of AUaLo^, " the Just," and reigned over
Bactria probably from about B.C. i6o to 150. Nothing is
known in detail of the circumstances of his reign ; but there is
reason to believe that Bactria now rapidly declined in power,
being pressed upon by the Scythian nomades towards the
north, and by the Parthians on the west and south, and con-
tinually losing one province after another to the invaders. It
was in vain that these unhappy Greeks implored in their isola-
tion the aid of their Syrian brethren against the constant en-
croachments of the barbarians. The expedition of Demetrius
Nicator, undertaken for their relief, B.C. 142, terminated in his
defeat and capture. Hellenic culture and civilization proved
in this quarter no match for barbaric force, and had of neces-
sity to give way and retreat. After the reign of Heliocles, we
have no further indication of Greek rulers to the north of the
Paropamisus. On the southern side of the mountain-chain
somewhat more of tenacity was shown. In Cabul and Canda-
har Greek kingdoms, ofifshoots of the Bactrian, continued to
exist down to about B.C. 80, when the last remnant of Hellenic
power in this quarter was swept away by the Yue-chi and
other Scythic, or Tartar races.

Kingdom of Parthia.

The Parthian kingdom is said to have been founded nearly
at the same time with the Bactrian, during the reign of An-
tiochus Theus in Syria, about B.C. 255 or 256. It originated,
however, not in the revolt of a satrap, but in the uprising of a
nation. Reinforced by a kindred body of Turanians from be-
yond the Jaxartes, the Parthi of the region lying south-east of
the Caspian, rose in revolt against their Grecian masters, and
succeeded in establishing their independence. From a small
beginning they gradually spread their power over the greater
part of Western Asia, being for a considerable period lords of

ANCIENT HISTORY 255

all the countries between the Euphrates and the Sutlej. As
the Parthian kingdom, though a fragment of the empire of
Alexander, was never absorbed into that of the Romans, but
continued to exist side by side with the Roman empire during
the most flourishing period of the latter, it is proposed to re-
serve the details of the history for the next Book, and to give
only this brief notice of the general character of the monarchy
in the present place.

Kingdom ofjiidaa.

Though the Jewish kingdom, which came into being mid-
way in the Syrian period, originating in the intolerable cruel-
ties and oppressions of the Syrian kings, was geographically
of such small extent as scarcely to claim distinct treatment in a
work which must needs omit to notice many of the lesser states
and kingdoms, yet the undying interest which attaches to the
Jewish people, and the vast influence which the nation has ex-
ercised over the progress of civilization, will justify, it is
thought, in the present place, not only on account of the king-
dom, but a sketch of the general history of the nation from the
time when, as related in the first Book, it was carried into
captivity by Nebuchadnezzar to the period of the re-establish-
ment of independence. This history naturally divides itself
into two periods: — i. From the Captivity to the fall of the
Persian empire, B.C. 586 to 323 ; and, 2. From the fall of the
Persian empire to the re-establishment of an independent king-
dom, B.C. 323 to 168. The history of the kingdom may also
be most conveniently treated in two portions: — i. The Mac-
cabee period, from B.C. 168 to 37 ; and, 2. The period of the
Herods, B.C. 37 to A.D. 44, when Judaea became finally a Ro-
man province. Thus the entire history will fall under four
heads.

First Period. — About fifty years after the completion of the
Captivity by Nebuchadnezzar, and nearly seventy years after
its commencement, a great change was effected in the condi-
tion of the Jewish people by Cyrus. That monarch, having
captured Babylon in the year B.C. 538, found among his new
subjects an oppressed race, in whose religion he recognized a

256 RAWLINSON

considerable resemblance to his own, and in whose fortunes he
therefore took a special interest. Learning that they had been
violently removed from their own country two generations
previously, and finding that numbers of them had a strong de-
sire to return, he gave permission that such as wished might
go back and re-establish themselves in their country. Accord-
ingly, a colony, numbering 42,360 persons, besides their ser-
vants, set out from Babylonia, and made their way to Jerusa-
lem; in or near which the greater number of them settled.
This colony, at the head of which was Zerubbabel, a descend-
ant of the old line of kings, was afterwards strengthened by two
others, one led by Ezra, in B.C. 458, and the other by Nehe-
miah, in B.C. 445. Besides these known accessions, there was
probably also for many years a continual influx of individuals,
or families, who were attracted to their own land, not only by
the love of country, which has always been so especially strong
in the Jews, but also by motives of religion. Still great num-
bers of Jews, probably half the nation, remained where they
had so long resided, in Babylonia and the adjoining countries.

The exiles who returned under Zerubbabel belonged pre-
dominantly, if not exclusively, to three tribes, Judah, Levi, and
Benjamin. It was their first object to rebuild their famous
Temple on its former site, and to re-establish the old Temple-
service. But in this work they were greatly hindered by their
neighbors. A mixed race, partly Israelite, partly foreign —
including Babylonians, Persians, Elamites, Arabs, and others
— had repeopled the old kingdom of Samaria, and established
there a mongrel worship, in part Jehovistic, in part idolatrous.
On the first arrival of the Jewish colony, this mixed race pro-
posed to join the new-comers in the erection of their Temple,
and to make it a common sanctuary open both to themselves
and the Jews. But such a course would have been dangerous
to the purity of religion; and Zerubbabel very properly de-
clined the offer. His refusal stirred up a spirit of hostility
among the " Samaritans ; " which showed itself in prolonged
efforts to prevent the rebuilding of the Temple and the city —
efforts which were for a while successful, considerably delay-
ing, though they could not finally defeat, the work.

The favor of Darius Hystaspis allowed the Jews to complete

ANCIENT HISTORY 257

their Temple, and to establish themselves firmly in the country
of their ancestors, despite the ill-will of the surrounding na-
tions and tribes. But in the reign of his successor, Xerxes,
a terrible danger was incurred. That weak prince allowed his
minister, Haman (Omanes?), to persuade him that it would
be for the advantage of his empire, if the Jews, who were to be
found in various parts of his dominions, always a distinct race,
not amalgamating with those among whom they lived, could
be quietly got rid of. Having obtained the monarch's consent,
he planned and prepared a general massacre, by which on one
day the whole race was to be swept from the earth. Fortu-
nately for the doomed nation, the inclination of the fickle king
had shifted before the day of execution came, the interposition
of the wife in favor at the time, who was a Jewess, having
availed for the preservation of her people. Instead of being
taken unawares by their enemies, and massacred unresistingly,
the Jews were everywhere warned of their danger and allowed
to stand on their defense. The weight of the government was
thrown on their side ; and the result was that, wherever they
were attacked, they triumphed, and improved their future po-
sition by the destruction of all their most bitter adversaries.

Though the Jews had thus escaped this great danger, and
had strengthened their position by the destruction of so many
of their enemies, yet their continued existence as a separate
nation was still far from secure. Two causes imperilled it. In
spite of the refusal to allow foreigners, even though partially
allied in race, to take part in the rebuilding of the Temple, a
tendency showed itself, as time went on, towards a fusion
with the surrounding peoples. The practice of intermarriage
with these peoples commenced, and had gained a great head
when Ezra brought his colony from Babylon in the seventh
year of Longimanus, B.C. 458. By the earnest efforts, first
of Ezra, and then of Nehemiah, about B.C. 434, this evil was
checked.

The other peril was of a different kind. Jerusalem, though
rebuilt on the old site by the colony of Zerubbabel, was without
walls or other defenses, and thus lay open to attack on the
part of any hostile neighbor. The authority of Persia was
weak in the more remote provinces, which not unfrequently
17

258 RAWLINSON

revolted, and remained for years in a state bordering on an-
archy. It was an important gain to the Jews when, in the
twentieth year of Artaxerxes, Nehemiah came down from the
court with authority to refortify the city, and effected his pur-
pose despite the opposition which he encountered, B.C. 445.

It was a feature of the Persian system to allow the nations
under their rule a good deal of self-government and internal
independence. Judaea was a portion of the Syrian satrapy, and
had no doubt to submit to such requisitions as the Syrian satrap
made upon it for men and money. But, so long as these requi-
sitions were complied with, there was not much further inter-
ference with the people, or with their mode of managing their
own affairs. Occasionally a local governor (Tirshatha), with
a rank and title below those of a satrap, was appointed by the
Crown to superintend Judaea, or Jerusalem ; but these officers
do not appear to have succeeded each other with regularity,
and, when they were appointed, it would seem that they were
always natives. In default of a regular succession of such
governors, the High-priests came to be regarded as not merely
the religious but also the political heads of the nation, and the
general direction of affairs fell into their hands.

Second Period. — In the partitions which were made of Alex-
ander's dominions at Babylon and at Triparadisus, the Syrian
satrapy, which included Palestine, was constituted a separate
government. But a very little time elapsed before Ptolemy
Lagi annexed the satrapy, the southern division of which con-
tinued thenceforward, except during short intervals, a portion
of the kingdom of Egypt, until the reign of Ptolemy Epiphanes.
It is uncertain whether Alexander assigned the Jews any spe-
cial privileges in the great city which he founded in Egypt ; but
there can be no doubt that the early Ptolemies highly favored
this class of their subjects, attracting them in vast numbers
to their capital, encouraging their literature, and granting them
many privileges. The subjection of Judaea to Egypt lasted
from B.C. 320 to B.C. 203 ; and though the country was during
this space ravaged more than once by the forces of contending
armies, yet on the whole the time must be regarded as one
of general peace and prosperity. The High-priests continued
to be at the head of the state, and ruled Judaea without much
oppressive interference from the Egyptians.

ANCIENT HISTORY 359

Towards the close of the Ptolemaic period, the Jews began
to have serious cause of complaint against their Egyptian rul-
ers. The fourth Ptolemy (Philopator), a weak and debauched
prince, attempted to violate the sanctity of the Jewish Temple
by entering it, and, when his attempt was frustrated, sought to
revenge himself by punishing the Alexandrian Jews, who had
done him no injury at all. It was the natural result of these
violent proceedings that the Jews, in disgust and alarm, should
seek a protector elsewhere. Accordingly, when Antiochus the
Great, in the infancy of Ptolemy Epiphanes, determined to
attack Eg^'pt, and to annex, if possible, to his own dominions
the valuable maritime tract extending from his province of
Upper Syria to the Sinaitic Desert, the Jews voluntarily joined
him ; and though Ptolemy's general, Scopas, recovered most
of what had been lost, yet Antiochus, by the victory of Paneas,
B.C. 198, was left in final possession of the whole region, which
thenceforth, though often disputed by Egypt, became a pos-
session of the Syrian kings.

Under Antiochus the Great, and for a time under his elder
son, Seleucus Philopator, the Jews had no reason to repent the
exchange they had made. Both Antiochus, and Seleucus for
a while, respected the privileges of the nation, and abstained
from any proceedings that could give umbrage to their new
subjects. But towards the close of the reign of Seleucus, an
important change of policy took place. The wealth of the
Jewish Temple being reported to the Syrian monarch, and
his own needs being great, he made an attempt to appropri-
ate the sacred treasure, which was however frustrated, either
by miracle, or by the contrivance of the High-priest Onias.
This unwarrantable attempt of Seleucus was followed by
worse outrages in the reign of his brother and successor, An-
tiochus Epiphanes. Not only did that monarch sell the office
of High-priest, first to Jason and then to Menelaiis, but he
endeavored to effect by systematic proceedings the complete
Hellenization of the Jews, whereto a party in the nation was
already sufficiently inclined. Further, having, by his own
iniquitous proceedings in the matter of the high-priesthood,
given occasion to a civil war between the rival claimants, he
chose to regard the war as rebellion against his authority, and

26o RAWLINSON

on his return from his second Egyptian campaign, B.C. 170,
took possession of Jerusalem, and gave it up to massacre and
pillage. At the same time he plundered the Temple of its
sacred vessels and treasures. Nor was this all. Two years
afterwards, B.C. 168, he caused Jerusalem to be occupied a
second time by an armed force, set up an idol altar in the
Temple, and caused sacrifice to be offered there to Jupiter
Olympius. The Jews were forbidden any longer to observe
the Law, and were to be Hellenized by main force. Hence
the rising under the Maccabees, and the gradual re-establish-
ment of independence.

Third Period. — At first the patriots who rose up against the
attempt to annihilate the national religion and life were a
scanty band, maintaining themselves with difficulty in the
mountains against the forces of the Syrian kings. Jerusalem,
which was won by Judas Maccabaeus, was lost again at his
death; and it was not till about B.C. 153, fourteen years after
the first revolt, that the struggle entered on a new phase in
consequence of the contentions which then began between
different pretenders to the Syrian throne. When war arose be-
tween Demetrius and Alexander Balas, the support of the
Jews was felt to be of importance by both parties. Both, con-
sequently, made overtures to Jonathan, the third Maccabee
prince, who was shortly recognized not only as prince, but
also as High-priest of the nation. From this time, as there
were almost constant disputes between rival claimants of the
crown in Syria, the Jews were able to maintain themselves
with comparative ease. Once or twice, during a pause in the
Syrian contest, they were attacked and were forced to make a
temporary submission. But the general result was that they
maintained, and indeed continually enlarged, their indepen-
dence. For some time they did not object to acknowledge the
Syrian monarch as their suzerain, and to pay him an annual
tribute; but after the death of Antiochus VH. (Sidetes) all
such payments seem to have ceased, and the complete inde-
pendence of the country was established. Coins were struck
bearing the name of the Maccabee prince, and the title of
" King." Judaea was indeed from this time as powerful a
monarchy as Syria. John Hyrcanus conquered Samaria and

ANCIENT HISTORY s6x

Idumaea, and thus largely extended the Jewish boundaries,
exactly at the time when those of Syria were undergoing rapid
contraction.

The deliverance of the state from any further fear of sub-
jection by Syria was followed almost immediately by internal
quarrels and dissensions, which led naturally to the acceptance
of a position of subordination under another power. The
Pharisees and Sadducees, hitherto mere religious sects, be-
came transformed into political factions. Civil wars broke out.
The members of the royal family quarrelled with each other,
and the different pretenders to the crown appealed for assist-
ance to foreign nations. About B.C. 63 the Romans entered
upon the scene ; and for the last twenty-six years of the Mac-
cabee period — B.C. 63 to 37 — while feeble princes of the once
mighty Asmonaean family still nominally held the throne, the
Great Republic was really supreme in Palestine, took tribute,
and appointed governors, or sanctioned the rule of kings, at
her pleasure. It is the change of dynasty, and not any change
in the internal condition of the country, that causes the year
B.C. 37 to be taken as that at which to draw the line between
the close of one period and the commencement of another.

Fourth Period. — During the fourth period Roman influence
was, not only practically, as during much of the third period,
but professedly predominant over the country. The Herods,
who owed their establishment in authority wholly to the Ro-
mans, had no other means of maintaining themselves than by
preserving the favor of their patrons. Obnoxious, except to
a small fraction of the nation, from their Idumaean descent,
they were hated still more as the minions of a foreign power,
a standing proof to the nation of its own weakness and de-
graded condition. On the other hand, there were no doubt
some who viewed the rule of the Herods as, in a certain sense,
a protection against Rome, a something interposed between
the nation and its purely heathen oppressors, saving the na-
tional life from extinction, and offering the best compromise
which circumstances permitted between an impossible entire
independence and a too probable absorption into the empire.
Such persons were willing to sec in Herod the Great, and again
in Herod Agjippa, the Messiah — the king foredoomed to save

262 RAWLINSON

them from the yoke of the foreigner, and to obtain for them
the respect, if not even the obedience, of the surrounding
peoples.

But these feeUngs, and the attachment to the dynasty which
grew out of them, must have become weaker as time went on.
The kingdom of the Herods gradually lost instead of gaining
in power. Rome continually encroached more and more. As
early as A.D. 8, a portion of Palestine, and the most important
portion in the eyes of the Jews, was formally incorporated into
the Roman empire; and though the caprice of an emperor
afterwards revoked this proceeding, and restored another
Herod to the throne of his grandfather, yet from the moment
when the first Procurator levied taxes in a Jewish province all
but the willfully blind must have seen what was impending.
The civil authority of the last native prince over Judsea came
to an end in A.D. 44 ; and the whole of Palestine, except a small
district held as a kingdom by Agrippa II., was from that time
absorbed into the empire, being appended to the Roman prov-
ince of Syria and ruled wholly by Roman Procurators. The
national life was consequently at the last gasp. As far as
political forms went, it was extinct ; but there remained enough
of vital energy in the seeming corpse for the nation once more
to reassert itself, and to show by the great " War of Indepen-
dence " that it was not to be finally crushed without a fearful
struggle, the issue of which at one time appeared almost
doubtful.

The proximate cause of the great Jewish revolt and of the
" War of Independence " was the oppression of the Procura-
tors, and especially of Gessius Florus. But, even had the Ro-
man governors ruled mildly, it is probable that a rebellion
would sooner or later have broken out. The Roman system
was unlike those of the foreign powers to which Judaea had
in former times submitted. It was intolerant of differences,
and aimed everywhere, not only at absorbing, but at assimi-
lating the populations. The Jews could under no circum-
stances have allowed their nationality to be crushed other-
wise than by violence. As it was, the tyranny of Gessius
Florus precipitated a struggle which must have come in any
case, and made the contest fiercer, bloodier, and more pro-

ANCIENT HISTORY ^63

tracted than it might have been otherwise. From the first
revolt against his authority to the capture of the city by Titus
was a period of nearly five years, A.D. 66 to 70. The fall of
the city was followed by its destruction, partly as a punishment
for the desperation of the resistance, but more as a precaution
to deprive the Jews, now felt to be really formidable, of their
natural rallying-point in any future rebellion.

BOOK V

HISTORY OF ROME AND HISTORY OF
PARTHIA

TULLIA DRIVING OVER HER FATHER'S CORPSE.

Photogravure from the original painting by Ernst Hildebrand.

Tuilia was a daughter of Servius Tullius, and the wife of Aruns, brother of
Tarquin. She murdered her husband ; and Tarquin, having killed his wife, mar-
ried her, slew Servius Tullius, and proclaimed himself King. According to the
Roman legend Tuilia rode to the Senate house to greet her husband as King, and
on her return drove over the dead body of her father, which lay in the way. The
street through which she drove thereafter bore the name of Vicus Sceleratus —
Abominable Street.

BOOK V

HISTORY OF ROME FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TO
THE FALL OF THE WESTERN EMPIRE, A.D. 476, AND
PARALLEL HISTORY OF PARTHIA.

PART I.— HISTORY OF ROME.

PRELIMINARY REMARKS ON THE GEOGRAPHY
OF ANCIENT ITALY.

The Italian Peninsula is the smallest of the three tracts which
project themselves from the European continent southward
into the Mediterranean. Its greatest length between the Alps
and Cape Spartivento is 720 miles, and its greatest width be-
tween the Little St. Bernard and the hills north of Trieste is
330 miles. The ordinary width, however, is only 100 miles;
and the area is thus, even including the littoral islands, not
much more than 110,000 square miles. The peninsula was
bounded on the north and north-west by the Alps, on the east
by the Adriatic, on the south by the Mediterranean, and on
the west of the Tyrrhenian Sea (Mare Tyrrhenum).

The littoral extent of Italy is, in proportion to its area, very
considerable, chiefly owing to the length and narrowness of the
peninsula ; for the main coasts are but very slightly indented.
Towards the west a moderate number of shallow gulfs, or
rather bays, give a certain variety to the coast-line ; while on
the east there is but one important headland, that of Gargano ;
and but one bay of any size, that of Manfredonia. Southward,
however, the shore has two considerable indentations in what
would otherwise be but a short line, viz., the deep Gulf of
Taranto and the shallower one of Squillace. A character gen-
erally similar attaches to the coasts of the Italian islands, Sar-

267

868 RAWLINSON

dinia, Sicily, and Corsica; and hence, though a nautical ten-
dency belongs naturally to the Italian people, the tendency is
not so distinct and pronounced as in the neighboring country
of Greece.

The Mountains of Italy consist of the two famous chains of
the Alps and the Apennines. The Alps, which bound Italy
along the whole of its northern and a part of its western side,
form a lofty barrier naturally isolating the region from the
rest of Europe. Nowhere less along the entire boundary-line
than 4000 feet in height, and varying from that minimum to a
maximum of 15,000 feet, they are penetrable by no more than
ten or twelve difficult passes, even at the present day. Their
general direction is from east to west, or speaking more strict-
ly, from N.E. by E. to S.W. by W. ; but, at a certain point
in their course, the point in which they culminate, this direc-
tion ceases, and they suddenly change their course and run
nearly due north and south. Mont Blanc stands at the corner
thus formed, like a gigantic buttress at the angle of a mighty
building. The length of the chain from Mont Blanc south-
ward to the coast is about 150 miles ; the length eastward,
so far as the Alps are Italian, is about 330 miles. Thus this
huge barrier guards Italy for a distance of 480 miles with a
rampart which in ancient time could scarcely be scaled. From
the point where the Alps, striking southward from Mont Blanc,
reach most nearly to the sea, a secondary chain is thrown oflf,
which runs at first from west to east, almost parallel with the
shore, to about the longitude of Cremona (10° east from Green-
wich, nearly), after which it begins to trend south of east, and
passing in this direction across about three-fourths of the
peninsula, it again turns still more to the south, and proceeds
in a course which is, as nearly as possible, due south-east, par-
allel to the two coasts of the peninsula, along its entire length.
This chain is properly the Apennines. In modern geography
its more western portion bears the name of " The Maritime
Alps ; " but as the chain is really continuous from a point a
little north-east of Nice to the neighborhood of Reggio (Rhe-
gium), a single name should be given to it throughout ; and,
for distinction's sake, that name should certainly not be " Alps "
but " Apennines." The Apennines in Northern Italy consist

ANCIENT HISTORY 269

of but a single chain, which throws off twisted spurs to the
right hand and to the left ; but, when Central Italy is reached,
the character of the range becomes more complicated. Below
Lake Fucinus the chain bifurcates. While one range, the
stronger of the two, pursues the old south-easterly direction,
another of minor elevation branches off to the south, and ap-
proaching the south coast very closely in the vicinity of Saler-
num, curves round and rejoins the main chain near Compsa.
The range then proceeds in a single line nearly to Venusia,
when it splits once more ; and while one branch runs on nearly
due east to the extreme promontory of lapygia, the other
proceeds almost due south to Rhegium.

The most marked feature of Italian geography is the strong
contrast in which Northern stands to Southern Italy. North-
em Italy is almost all plain; Southern almost all mountain.
The conformation of the mountain ranges in the north leaves
between the parallel chains of the Swiss Alps and the Upper
Apennines a vast tract — from 100 to 150 miles in width, which
(speaking broadly) may be called a single plain — " the Plain
of the Po," or " the Plain of Lombardo-Venetia." In Southern
Italy, or the Peninsula proper, plains of more than a few miles
in extent are rare. The Apennines, with their many-twisted
spurs, spread broadly over the land, and form a continuous
mountain region which occupies at least one half of the sur-
face. But this is not all. Where the chain is sufficiently nar-
row to allow of the interposition, between its base and the
shore, of any tolerably wide tract — as in Etruria, in Latium,
and in Campania — separate systems of hills and mountains,
volcanic in character, exist, and prevent the occurrence of any
really extensive levels. The only exception to this general rule
is in Apulia, where an extensive tract of plain is found about
the Candelaro, Cervaro, and Ofanto rivers.

The Rivers of Italy are exceedingly numerous; but only
one or two are of any considerable size. The great river is the
Po (Padus), which, rising at the foot of Monte Viso, in lat. 44**
40', long. 7°, nearly, drains almost the whole of the great north-
em plain, receiving above a hundred tributaries, and having
a course which, counting only main windings, probably exceeds
400 miles. The chief of its tributaries are the Duria (Dora

27© RAWLINSON

Baltea), the Ticinus (Ticino), the Addua (Adda), the OUius
(OgHo), and the Mincius (Mincio), from the north; from the
south, the Tanarus (Tanaro), the Trebia (Trebbia), the Tarus
(Taro), the Secia (Secchia), the Scultenna (Panaro), and the
Rhenus (Reno). The next most important of the Italian rivers
is the Athesis, or Adige, which, rising in the Tyrolean Alps,
flows southward nearly to Verona ; after which, curving round,
it runs parallel with the Po into the Adriatic. Both these rivers
are beyond the limits of the Peninsula proper. Within those
limits the chief streams are the Arnus, Tiber, Liris, Vulturnus,
and Silarus on the western side of the Apennines; the TEsis,
Aternus, Tifernus, Frento, Cerbalus, and Aufidus to the east
of those mountains.

Italy possesses a fair number of lakes. Most of these
lie towards the north, on the skirts of the Alps, at the
point where the mountains sink down into the plain. The
chief are the Benacus (Lago di Garda), between Lombardy
and Venetia, the Sevinus (Lago d' Iseo), the Larius (Lago di
Como), the Ceresius (Lago di Lugano), the Verbanus (Lago
Maggiore), and the Lago d' Orta, which is unnoticed by the
ancients. There is one important lake, the Lacus Fucinus, in
the Central Apennine region. In Etruria are the Trasimenus
(Lago di Perugia), the Volsiniensis (Lago di Bolsena), and the
Sabatinus (Lago di Bracciano). Besides these, there are nu-
merous lagoons on the sea-coast, especially in the neighbor-
hood of Venice, and several mountain tarns of small size, but
of great beauty.

The Italian Islands are, from their size, their fertility, and
their mineral treasures, peculiarly important. They constitute
nearly one-fourth of the whole area of the country. Sicily is
exceedingly productive both in corn and in wine of an excellent
quality. Sardinia and Corsica are rich in minerals. Even the
little island of Elba (Ilva) is valuable for its iron. Sicily and
the Lipari isles yield abundance of sulphur.

The only Natural Division of Italy is into Northern and
Southern — the former comprising the plain of the Po and the
mountains inclosing it, so far as they are Italian; the latter
coextensive with the Peninsula proper. It is usual, however,
to divide the peninsula itself artificially into two portions by

ANCIENT HISTORY 271

a line drawn across it from the mouth of the Silarus to that of
the Tifemus. In this way a triple division of Italy is produced :
and the three parts are then called Northern, Central, and
Southern. It will be convenient to enumerate the countries
into which Italy was anciently parcelled out under the three
heads furnished by this latter division.

Northern Italy contained, in the most ancient times to which
history goes back, the three countries of Liguria, Upper
Etruria, and Venetia. After a while, part of Liguria and al-
most the whole of Upper Etruria were occupied by Gallic
immigrants; and, the boundary-lines being to some extent
changed, there still remained in this large and important tract
three countries only, viz., Liguria, Venetia, and Gallia Cisal-
pina; the last-named having, as it were, taken the place of
Upper Etruria.

Liguria was the tract at the extreme west of Northern Italy.
Before the Gallic invasion it probably reached to the Pennine
and Graian Alps ; but in later times it was regarded as bounded
on the north by the Po, on the west by the Alps from Monte
Viso (Vesulus) southward, on the south by the Mediterranean,
and on the east by the river Macra. It was a country almost
entirely mountainous ; for spurs from the Alps and Apen-
nines occupy the whole tract between the mountain-ranges
and the river Po, as far down as long. 9°. Liguria derived its
name from its inhabitants, the Ligures or Ligyes, a race who
once occupied the entire coast from below the mouth of the
Amo to Massilia. Its chief towns were Genua (Genoa), Nicae
(Nice), and Asta (Asti).

Venetia was at the opposite side, or extreme east, of North
Italy. It is difficult to say what were its original or natural
limits. From the earliest times of which we have any knowl-
edge, the Veneti were always encroached upon, first by the
Etruscans and then by the Gauls, until a mere corner of North
Italy still remained in their possession. This corner lay be-
tween Histria on the one side, and the Lesser Medaucus upon
the other; southward it extended to the Adriatic Sea, north-
ward to the flanks of the Alps. It was a tract of country for the
most part exceedingly flat, well watered by streams flowing
from the Alps, and fertile. The chief city in ancient times was

272 RAWLINSON

Patavium, on the Lesser Meduacus ; but this place was after-
wards ecHpsed by Aquileia.

The Etruscan state, which the Gauls conquered, was a con-
federacy of twelve cities, whose territory reached from the
Ticinus on the west to the Adriatic and the mouths of the Po
upon the east. Among its cities were Melpum, Mediolanum
(Milan), Mantua, Verona, Hatria, and Felsina or Bononia.
Northward it was bounded by the Alps, southward by the
Apennines and the course of the Utis, or perhaps by that of
the Rubicon. When the Gauls made their conquests they
overstepped these boundaries, taking from the Ligurians all
their territory north of the Padus, and perhaps some to the
south, about Placentia and Parma, encroaching on the Veneti
towards the east, and southward advancing into Umbria. Thus
Gallia Cisalpina had larger limits than had belonged to North
Etruria. It was bounded on the north and west by the Alps ;
on the south by Liguria, the main chain of the Apennines, and
the ^sis river ; on the east by the Adriatic and Venetia. The
whole tract, except in some swampy districts, was richly fertile.
While it remained Gallic, it was almost without cities. The
Gauls lived, themselves, in open unwalled villages, and suf-
fered most of the Etruscan towns to fall to decay. Some, as
Melpum, disappeared. A few maintained themselves as Etrus-
can, in a state of semi-independence ; e. g., Mantua and Verona.
In Roman times, however, the country was occupied by a
number of most important cities, chiefly Roman colonies.
Among these were, in the region south of the Po, Placentia,
Parma, Mutina (now Modena), Bononia (now Bologna), Ra-
venna, and Ariminium (now Rimini) ; and across the river to
the north of it, Augusta Taurinorum (Turin), Ticinum (Pavia),
Mediolanum (Milan), Brixia (Brescia), Cremona, Mantua,
Verona, and Vincentia (now Vicenza).

Central Italy, or the upper portion of the Peninsula proper,
comprised six countries — Etruria, Latium, and Campania
towards the west ; Umbria, Picenum, and the Sabine territory
(which had no general name) towards the east. These coun-
tries included the three most important in Italy, viz., Latium,
Etruria, and the territory of the Sabines.

Etruria, or Tyrrhenia (as it was called by the Greeks), was

ANCIENT HISTORY 273

the tract immediately south and west of the northern Apen-
nines, interposed between that chain and the Mediterranean.
It was bounded on the north by Liguria and GaUia Cisalpina ;
on the east by Umbria and the old Sabine country ; on the west
by the Mediterranean Sea ; and on the south by Latium. The
line of separation between it and the rest of the continent was
very marked, being first the strong chain of the Apennines,
and then, almost from its source, the river Tiber. Etruria was
watered by two main streams, the Arnus (Arno), and the Clanis
(Chiana), a tributary of the Tiber. It was for the most part
mountainous, consisting in its northern and eastern portions
of strong spurs thrown off from the Apennines, and in its south-
em and western, of a separate system of rocky hills, ramifying
irregularly, and reaching from the valleys of the Arnus and
Clanis very nearly to the coast. The little level land which it
contained was along the courses of the rivers and near the
sea-shore. The soil was generally rich, but in places marshy.
The country contained three important lakes. The original
Etrurian state consisted of a confederacy of twelve cities, among
which were certainly Volsinii, Tarquinii, Vetulonium, Perusia,
and Qusium ; and probably Volaterrae, Arretium, Rusellae,
Veii, and Agylla or Caere. Other important towns were Pisae
(Pisa), and Faesulae (Fiesole), north of the Arnus ; Populonia
and Cosa, on the coast between the Arnus and the Tiber ; Cor-
tona in the Clanis valley; and Falerii near the Tiber, about
eighteen miles north of Veii.

Latium lay below Etruria, on the left bank of the Tiber.
It was bounded on the north by the Tiber, the Anio, and the
Upper Liris rivers; on the west and south by the Mediter-
ranean; on the east by the Lower Liris and a spur of the-
Apennines. These, however, were not its original limits, but
those whereto it ultimately attained. Anciently many non-
Latin tribes inhabited portions of the territory. The Volsci
held the isolated range of hills reaching from near Praeneste
to the coast at Tarracina or Anxur. The ^qui were in pos-
session of the Mons Algidus, and of the mountain-range be-
tween Praeneste and the Anio. The Hernici were located in
the valley of the Trerus, a tributary of the Liris. On the Lower
Liris were established the Ausones. The nation of the Latins
18

274 RAWLINSON

formed, we are told, a confederacy of thirty cities, Alba having
originally the pre-eminency. Among the thirty the most im-
portant were the following: — Tibur, Gabii, Prseneste, Tuscu-
lum, Velitrse, Aricia, Lanuvium, Laurentum, Lavinium, Ardea,
Antium, Circeii, Anxur or Tarracina, Setia, Norba, and Satri-
cum. Latium was chiefly a low plain, but diversified towards
the north by spurs from the Apennines, in the centre and
towards the south by two important ranges of hills. One of
these, known as " the Volscian range," extends in a continuous
line from near Praeneste to Tarracina ; the other, which is quite
separate and detached, rises out of the plain between the Vols-
cian range and the Tiber, and is known as " the Alban range,"
or the " Mons Algidus." Both are in the western part of the
country. The eastern is comparatively a flat region. Here
were Anagnia, the old capital of the Hernici, Arpinum, Fregel-
Ise, Aquinum, Interamna ad Lirim ; and, on the coast, Lantulae,
Fundi, Formiae, Minturnae, and Vescia,

Campania in its general character very much resembled
Latium, but the isolated volcanic hills which here diversified
the plain were loftier and placed nearer the coast. To the
extreme south of the country a strong spur ran out from the
Apennines terminating in the promontory of Minerva, the
southern protection of the Bay of Naples. Campania extended
along the coast fiiom the Liris to the Silarus, and reached in-
land to the more southern of the two Apennine ranges, which,
separating a little below Lake Fucinus, reunite at Compsa.
The plain country was all rich, especially that about Capua,
Among the principal Campanian towns were Capua, the cap-
ital, Nola and Teanum in the interior, and upon the coast Sin-
uessa, Cumae, Puteoli, Parthenope, or Neapolis, Herculaneum,
Pompeii, Surrentum, Salernum, and Picentia.

Umbria lay east of Etruria, from which it was separated,
first by the range of the Apennines, and then by the river
Tiber. It was bounded on the north by Gallia Cisalpina ; on
the east and south-east by Picenum and the Sabine country ;
on the south-west and west by Etruria. Before the invasion of
the Gauls it reached as far north as the Rubicon, and included
all the Adriatic coast between that stream and the ^sis ; but
after the coming of the Senones this tract was lost, and Umbria

ANCIENT HISTORY 275

was shut out from the sea. The Umbrian territory was almost
wholly mountainous, consisting, as it did, chiefly of the main
chain of the Apennines, together with the spurs on either side
of the chain, from the source of the Tiber to the junction with
the Tiber of the Nar. Some rich plains, however, occurred
in the Tiber and Lower Nar valleys. The chief towns of
Umbria were Iguvium, famous for its inscriptions ; Sentinum,
the scene of the great battle with the Gauls and Samnites;
Spoletium (now Spoleto) ; Interamna (now Terni) ; and Nar-
nia (Narni), which, though on the left bank of the Nar, was
still reckoned to Umbria.

Picenum extended along the coast of the Adriatic from the
i^sis to the Matrinus (Piomba) river. It was composed mainly
of spurs from the Apennines, but contained along the coast
some flat and fertile country. The chief towns were Ancona,
on the coast, Firnum (Femo), Asculum Picenum (Ascoli), and
Hadria (Atri), in the interior.

The territory of the Sabine races, in which Picenum ought
perhaps to be included, was at once the most extensive and
the most advantageously situated of all the countries of Central
Italy. In length, from the Mons Fiscellus (Monte Rotondo)
to the Mons Vultur (Monte Vulture), it exceeded 200 miles;
while in breadth it reached very nearly from sea to sea, bor-
dering the Adriatic from the Matrinus to the Tifemus rivers,
and closely approaching the Mediterranean in the vicinity of
Salernum. In the north it comprised all the valleys of the
Upper Nar and its tributaries, together with a portion of the
valley of the Tiber, the plain country south and east of Lake
Fucinus, and the valleys of the Suinus and Aternus rivers.
Its central mass was made up of the valleys of the Sagrus,
Trinius, and Tifernus, together with the mountain-ranges be-
tween them ; while southward it comprised the whole of the
great Samnite upland drained by the Vulturnus, and its tribu-
taries. The territory had many distinct political divisions.
The north-western tract, about the Nar and Tiber, reaching
from the main chain of the Apennines to the Anio, was the
country of the old Sabines (Sabini), the only race to which
that name is applied by the ancient writers. East and south-
east of this region, the tract about Lake Fucinus, and the val-

276 RAWLINSON

leys of the Suinus and Aternus rivers, were in the possession
of the League of the Four Cantons, the Marsi, Marrucini,
PeHgni, and Vestini, who probably were Sabine races. Still
farther to the east, the valleys of the Sagrus and Trinius, and
the coast tract from Ortona to the Tifernus, formed the coun-
try of the Frentani. South and south-east of this was Sam-
nium, comprising the high upland, the main chain of the
Apennines, and the eastern flank of that chain for a certain
distance. The chief of the Sabine towns were Reate on the
Velinus, a tributary of the Nar; Teate and Aternum on the
Aternus; Marrubium on Lake Fucinus; and Beneventum
and Bovianum in Samnium.

Southern Italy, or the tract below the Tifernus and Silarus
rivers, contained four countries — on the west, Lucania and
Bruttium; on the east, Apulia and Messapia, or, as it was
sometimes called, lapygia. The entire number of distinct coun-
tries in ancient Italy was thus thirteen.

Lucania extended along the west coast of Italy from the
Silarus to the Laiis river. Its boundary on the north was
formed by the Silarus, the chain of the Apennines from Compsa
to the Mons Vultur, and the course of the Bradanus (Bran-
dano). Eastward, its border was the shore of the Tarentine
Gulf; southward, where it adjoined Bruttium, the line of de-
marcation ran from the Lower Laiis across the mountains to
the Crathis, or river of Thurii. The country was both pict-
uresque and fertile, diversified by numerous spurs from the
Apennine range, and watered by a multitude of rivers. It had
few native cities of any importance ; but the coasts were thickly
occupied by Grecian settlements of great celebrity. Among
these were, on the west coast, Posidonia or Paestum, Elea or
Velia, Pyxus or Buxentum, and Laiis ; on the east, Metapon-
tum, Heracleia, Pandosia, Siris, Sybaris, and Thurii.

Bruttium adjoined Lucania on the south, and was a country
very similar in character. Its chief native city was Consentia,
in the interior, near the sources of the Crathis river. On the
western coast were the Greek towns of Temesa, Terina, Hip-
ponium, and Rhegium ; on the eastern those of Croton, Cau-
lonia, and Locri.

Apulia lay entirely on the eastern coast, adjoining Samnium

ANCIENT HISTORY 277

upon the west, and separated from the country of the Frentani
by the Tifemus river. The range of the Apennines, extending
from the Mons Vuhur eastward as far as long. 17° 40', divided
it from lapygia. ApuHa differed from all the other countries
of the Peninsula proper in being almost wholly a plain. Ex-
cept in the north-west comer of the province, no spurs of any
importance here quit the Apennines, but from their base ex-
tends a vast and rich level tract, from twenty to forty miles wide,
intersected by numerous streams, and diversified towards its
more eastern portion by a number of lakes. The tract is espe-
cially adapted for the grazing of cattle. Among its rivers are
the Aufidus, on the banks of which Cannae was fought, the Cer-
balus, and the river of Arpi. The only mountainous part of
Apulia is the north and north-west, where the Apennines send
down to the coast two strongly-marked spurs, one between
the Tifernus and the Frento rivers, the other, east of the Frento,
a still stronger and more important range, which running
towards the north-east reaches the coast, and forms the well-
known rocky promontory of Garganum. The chief cities of
Apulia were Larinum, near the Tifernus ; Luceria, Sipontum,
and Arpi, north of the Cerbalus; Salapia, between the Cer-
balus and Aufidus ; and Canusium, Cannae, and Venusia, south
of that river. It was usual to divide Apulia into two regions,
of which the north-western was called Daunia, the south-east-
em Peucetia.

Messapia, or lapygia, lay south and east of Apulia, compris-
ing the entire long promontory which has been called the
" heel " of Italy, and a triangular tract between the east Apen-
nine range and the river Bradanus. Towards the east it was
low and flat, full of numerous small lakes, and without impor-
tant rivers; westward it was diversified by numerous ranges
of hills, spurs from the Apulian Apennines, which sheltered
it upon the north and rendered it one of the softest and most
luxurious of the Italian countries. The most important of the
lapygian cities was Taras, or Tarentum, the famous Lacedae-
monian colony. Other Greek settlements were Callipolis (now
GallipoH), and Hydrus or Hydmntum (now Otranto). The
chief native town was Brundusium.

The geography of Italy is incomplete without a description

878 RAWLINSON

of the principal islands. These were three in number, Sicily,
Sardinia, and Corsica. There were also numerous islets along
the western and a few off the eastern coast, which will require
a very brief notice.

Sicily, which is estimated to contain about ten thousand
square miles, is an irregular triangle, the sides of which face
respectively the north, the east, and the south-west. None of
the coasts is much indented; but of the three, the northern
has the most noticeable bays and headlands. Here are the
gulfs of Castel-a-Mare, Palermo, Patti, and Milazzo ; the head-
lands of Trapani (Drepanum), Capo St. Vito, Capo di Gallo,
Capo Zaffarana, Capo Orlando, Capo Calava, and Capo Bianco.
The south-western, and most of the eastern, shores run in
smooth lines ; but towards the extreme south-east of the island
there is a fair amount of indentation. Good harbors are nu-
merous. The most remarkable are those of Messana and Syra-
cuse, the former protected by a curious curved strip of land,
resembling a sickle, whence the old name of Zancle ; the latter
rendered secure in all winds by the headland of Plemmyrium
and the natural breakwater of Ortygia. There are also excel-
lent ports at Lilybaeum and Panormus (Palermo). The moun-
tain system of Sicily consists of a main chain, the continuation
of the Bruttian Apennines (Aspromonte), which traverses the
island from east to west, beginning near Messina (Messana)
and terminating at Cape Drepanum. This main chain, known
in its different parts by various names, throws off, about mid-
way in its course, a strong spur, which strikes south-east and
terminates in Cape Pachynus (Passaro). Thus the island is
divided by its mountain system into three tracts of comparative
lowland — a narrow tract facing northward between the main
chain and the north coast ; a long and broad tract facing the
southwest, bounded on the north by the western half of the
main chain, and on the east by the spur ; and a broad but com-
paratively short tract facing the east, bounded on the west by
the spur, and on the north by the eastern half of the main chain.
In none of these lowlands, however, is there really much flat
country. Towards the north and towards the south-west, both
the main chain and the spur throw off numerous branches,
which occupy almost the whole country between the rivers;

ANCIENT HISTORY 979

while towards the east, where alone are there any extensive
plains, volcanic action has thrown up the separate and inde-
pendent mountain of Etna, which occupies with its wide-
spreading roots almost one-third of what should naturally have
been lowland. Thus Sicily, excepting in the tract between
Etna and Syracuse, where the famous " Piano di Catania " ex-
tends itself, is almost entirely made up of mountain and valley,
and, in a military point of view, is an exceedingly strong and
difficult country. Its chief rivers are the Simaethus on the east,
which drains nearly the whole of the great plain ; the Himera
and Halycus on the south ; and the Hypsa, near the extreme
south-west corner. The only important native town was Enna,
nearly in the centre of the island; all the other cities of any
note were settlements of foreigners; Eryx and Egesta, or
Segesta, of the Trojans (?); Lilybaeum, Motya, Panormus,
and Soloeis, or Soluntum, of the Carthaginians ; Himera, Mes-
sana, Tauromenium, Naxos, Catana, Megara Hyblaea, Syra-
cuse, Camarina, Gela, Agrigentum, and Selinus, of the Greeks.
Sardinia, which modem surveys show to be larger than
Sicily, has an area of probably about 11,000 square miles. It
is an oblong parallelogram, the sides of which may be viewed
roughly as facing the four cardinal points, though in reality
the south side has a slight inclination towards the east, and the
north side a stronger one towards the west. Though less
mountainous than either Sicily or Corsica, Sardinia is traversed
by an important chain which runs parallel with the eastern and
western shores, but nearer the former, from Cape Lungo-Sar-
do on the north to Cape Carbonara at the extreme south of
the island. This chain throws out numerous short branch
ranges on either side, which cover nearly the whole of the east-
em half of the island. The western half has three separate
mountain-clusters of its own. One, the smallest, is at the ex-
treme north-west corner of the island, between the Gulfs of
Asinara and Alghero ; another, three or four times larger, fills
the south-western corner, reaching from Cape Spartivento to
the Gulf of Oristano. Both these are, like the main range, of
primary (granitic) formation. The third cluster, which is in-
terposed between the two others, occupying the whole tract
extending northward from the Gulf of Oristano and the river

28o RAWLINSON

Tirso to the coast between the Turrilano and Coguinas rivers,
is much the largest of the three, and is of comparatively recent
volcanic formation. These mountain-clusters, together with
the main range, occupy by far the greater portion of the island.
They still, however, leave room for some important plains, as
especially that of Campidano on the south, which stretches
across from the Gulf of Cagliari to that of Oristano; that of
Ozieri on the north, on the upper course of the Coguinas ; and
that of Sassari in the north-west, which reaches across
the isthmus from Alghero to Porto Torres. Sardinia is
fairly fertile, but has always been noted for its malaria. Its
chief river was the Thyrsus (Tirso). The principal cities were
Caralis (Cagliari), on the south coast, in the bay of the same
name ; Sulci, at the extreme south-west of the island, opposite
the Insula Plumbaria; Neapolis, in the Gulf of Asinara; and
Olbia, towards the north-eastern end of the island. There was
no city of any importance in the interior.

Corsica, situated directly to the north of Sardinia, was more
mountainous and rugged than either of the other two great
islands. A strong mountain-chain ran through the island from
north to south, culminating towards the centre in the Mons
Antaeus (Monte Rotondo). Numerous branch ranges inter-
sected the country on either side of the main chain, rendering
the entire region one of constant mountain and valley. Streams
were numerous ; but the limits of the island were too narrow
for them to attain any considerable size. The chief town was
Alalia (afterwards Aleria), a colony of the Phocaeans. Besides
this, the only places of any importance were Mariana, on the
east coast, above Alalia, Centurimum (now Centuri), on the
west side of the northern promontory, Urcinium on the west
coast (now Ajaccio), and Talcinum (now Corte) in the interior.

The lesser islands adjacent to Italy were Ilva (Elba), be-
tween northern Corsica and the main-land; Igilium (Giglio)
and Dianium (Giannuti), opposite the Mons Argentarius in
Etruria ; Palmaria, Pontia, Sinonia, and Pandataria, off Anxur ;
Pithecussa (Ischia), Prochyta (Procida), and Capreae (Capri),
in the Bay of Naples ; Strongyle (Stromboli), Euonymus (Pan-
aria), Lipara (Lipari), Vulcania (Volcano), Didyme (Salina),
Phoenicussa (Felicudi), Ericussa (Alicudi), and Ustica, off the

ANCIENT HISTORY aSx

north coast of Sicily ; the JEgztes Insulae, off the western point
of the same island ; the Choerades Insulae, off Tarentum ; and
Trimetus (Tremiti) in the Adriatic, north of the Mons Gar-
ganus.

On the geography of Italy, the most important works are —

Cluverius, " Italia Antiqua." Lugd. Bat., 1624; 2 vols, folio.

Romanelli, " Antica Topografia istorica del Regno di Napoli."
Napoli, 1815; 3 vols. 4to.

Mannert, K., " Geographie der Griechen und Romer aus ihren Schrif-
ten dargestellt." Leipzig, 1801-29; 10 vols. 8vo.

Swinburne, H., " Travels in the Two Sicilies in the Years 1777-80."
London, 1783-85; 2 vols. 4to.

Dennis, G., " Cities and Cemeteries of the Etruscans." London, 1848;
2 vols. 8vo.

Abeken, " Mittel-Italien vor den Zeiten Romischer Herrschaft"
Stuttgart, 1843; 8vo.

Cramer, " Geographical and Historical Description of Ancient Italy."
Oxford, 1826; 2 vols. 8vo.

SKETCH OF THE HISTORY.

FIRST PERIOD.

The Ancient Traditional History from the Earliest Times to
the Commencement of the Republic, B.C. 508.*

Italy was inhabited, at the earliest times to which our knowl-
edge carries us back, by five principal races. These were the
Ligurians, the Venetians, the Etruscans, the Italians proper,
and the lapygians. The Ligurians and Venetians may have
been branches of one stock, the lUyrian ; but there is no suffi-

♦ Sources. Native. — A few fragments of the " Fasti Triumphales " be-
long to this early period; but such knowledge of it as we possess is
derived mainly from the works of historians. Among these the first
place must be assigned to the fragments of the early Annalists, espe-
cially of Q. Fabius Pictor, many of which are preserved in Dionysius
of Halicarnassus. The most copious native writer on the period is Livy,
who delivers an account of it in his First Book. Other native authori-
ties are Cicero, who has sketched the constitutional history of the period
in his treatise " De Republica " (book ii.), and Florus, who has briefly
epitomized it. The portion of Velleius Paterculus which treated of the
time is almost entirely lost. No lives of Nepos touch on it. Many

282 RAWLINSON

cient evidence to prove this connection. They were weak and
unimportant races, confined to narrow regions in the north,
and without any influence on the general history of Italy. Set-
ting them aside, therefore, for the present, we may confine our
attention to the three other races.

The lapygians were probably among the earliest settlers.
The heel of Italy, which stretches out towards Greece, invites
colonization from that quarter; and it would seem that at a
very remote date a stream of settlers passed across the narrow
sea from the Hellenic to the Italic peninsula, and landing on
the lapygian promontory spread themselves northward and
westward over the greater portion of the foot of Italy. The
language of the race in question remains in numerous inscrip-
tions which have been discovered in the Terra di Otranto, and
shows them to have been nearly connected with the Greeks.
Their worship of Greek gods, and the readiness with which, at
a later date, they became actually Hellenized, point in the same
direction. We have reason to conclude that a race kindred with
the Greeks held in the early times the greater part of Southern
Italy, which was thus prepared for the later more positively
Hellenic settlements. To this stock appear to have belonged
the Messapians, Peucetians, GEnotrians, the Chaones or
Chones, and perhaps the Daunii.

The Italians proper, who in the historical times occupy with
their numerous tribes almost the whole of Central Italy, appear
to have been later in-comers than the lapygians, to have
proceeded from the north, and to have pressed with great
weight on the semi-Greek population of the southern regions.
They comprised, apparently, four principal subordinate races ;
viz., the Umbrians, the Sabines, the Oscans, and the Latins.

allusions to it are contained, however, in the works of the poets and
grammarians, as Ovid (" Fasti "), Virgil (" ^neid," book vi.), Servius
("ad. .(Eneid."), Festus, and others. Foreign. — The Greek writers are
fuller on the early history than the Roman. The most important of
them is Dionysius of Halicarnassus, in whose work (" Archasologia Ro-
mana;" ed. Reiske. Lipsise, 1774-77; 6 vols. 8vo) the ante-regal and
regal periods occupy the first four books. Next to Dionysius may be
placed Plutarch, whose Lives of Romulus, Numa, and Poplicola bear
upon this portion of the history. The part of Diodorus Siculus which
treated of the time (books vii.-x.) is lost, with the exception of a few
brief fragments.

ANCIENT HISTORY 283

Of these the Umbrians and Oscans were very closely con-
nected. The Latins were quite distinct. The Sabines are sus-
pected to have been nearly allied to the Osco-Umbrians.

The Tuscans or Etruscans, the most powerful nation of the
north, differed in race completely from all the other inhabi-
tants of Italy. It appears to be, on the whole, most probable
that they were Turanians, of a type similar to that which is
found in various parts of Europe — Lapps and Finns in the
extreme north, Esthonians on the Baltic, Basques in Spain —
remnants of a primitive population that once, we may suppose,
overspread the whole of Europe. The original seat of the race,
so far as it is traceable, seems to have been Rhaetia, or the
country about the head-streams of the Rhine, the Inn, and the
Adige. Their native name was Ras ; and this name, changed
by the Italians into Rhaesi or Rhaeti, was long attached to the
mountain region from which their hordes had issued. These
hordes at a very remote time spread themselves over the plain
of the Po from the Ticinus to beyond the Adige, and formed
there, as we are told, a confederacy of twelve cities. After hav-
ing flourished in this tract for an indefinite period, they over-
flowed the mountain barrier to the south, and occupying the
region between the northern Apennines and the Tiber, formed
there a second, quite separate, confederacy, consisting, like the
northern one, of twelve distinct states. Subsequently, but
probably later than the period now under consideration, they
passed the Tiber and established temporarily a dominion in
Campania, where Capua and Nola were cities founded by them.

There can be no doubt that the Romans belonged, at any
rate predominantly, to the second of the three races who seem
in the early times to have divided the peninsula among them —
the race which has been here termed, Kar i^oxv^' " Italic."
They had, indeed, a tradition which connected them with a
body of immigrants who were thought to have come by sea
into Italy from the distant city of Troy, at a date which pre-
ceded by nearly 500 years the building of the city. And this
tradition was brought out into great prominence by writers
of the Imperial times. But, whatever amount of truth we may
suppose to be contained in the " story of ^neas," it is evident
that the crews of a few vessels landing on a thickly-peopled

284 RAWLINSON

coast, and belonging to a race not much more civilized than
that to which they came, could make but a very slight impres-
sion on the previous population, in which they would be sure
to be very soon swallowed up and absorbed. The Trojan col-
ony to Latium is therefore, whether true or false, a matter of
small consequence — it had no part in determining the ethnic
character of the Roman people.

Nor is there much difficulty in deciding to which of the
branch races included here under the general name of " Italic,"
the Romans belonged. Language is the most certain indica-
tion of race, and the language which the Romans spoke was
Latin. Their own traditions connected the early city in a spe-
cial way with Lavinium and Alba Longa; and these cities
were universally allowed to have been two of the thirty Latin
towns. To whatever extent the Romans were a mixed people
— and that they were so to some extent is admitted by all — it
is impossible to doubt that they were predominantly and es-
sentially— not Oscans, not Sabines, much less Umbrians — but
Latins.

It is, however, far from easy to determine in what exact
position the original Rome stood to the Latin stock. It is
clear that she was not a mere Latin town, not one of the thirty.
She stands in the early times of the monarchy quite outside
the confederacy ; and a peculiar character belongs to her which
is not simply and wholly Latin. The tradition which makes
her foundation the spontaneous act of a band of adventurous
young men, whose aflfection for the locality leads them to set
up a new town, which is also a new state, on the spot where
they have been wont to pasture their flocks, is at variance with
the condition of Italy at the time, which was not a wilderness,
with abundant waste land, whereon the first comer might set-
tle, but a thickly-peopled country, where every inch of ground
had an owner, or was disputed between neighboring tribes.
If there be any truth at all in the account which has come down
to us of the original settlement, that account must be a poeti-
cised version of a very ordinary occurrence. The Latin towns
were in the habit of extending or defending their territories by
the establishment of colonies. Nothing is more easily con-
ceivable than that the original Rome should have been a col-

ANCIENT HISTORY 285

ony from Alba Longa, planted in a strong though unhealthy
position at the extreme verge of the territory, where it was
threatened by the Tuscans upon the west and still more by the
advancing Sabines towards the north. Rome herself was after-
wards accustomed to plant her colonies in exactly such posi-
tions. Among the various conjectures which critics have
formed on the subject of the origin of Rome, that which re-
gards her as a colony from Alba appears to be the most worthy
of acceptance.

But if Rome was originally a mere Alban dependency, it is
certain that she did not long continue such. The first clearly
marked fact in her history is her entrance into voluntary union
with the natives of an adjacent Sabine settlement, an act which
implies independence and the assertion of sovereignty. The
colony must either previously have shaken off the yoke of the
mother-city, or else must, in the very act of uniting herself
with an alien people, have asserted autonomy. From the date
of the (TwoiKt,afjU><;, if no earlier, Rome was, it is clear, a self-
governing community. No power exercised control over her.
She stood aloof from the Latin league, on terms which were
at first rather hostile than friendly. Her position was unique
among the states and cities of the period. The amalgamation
of two bloods, two civilizations, two kindred, but still somewhat
different, religious systems, produced a peculiar people —
a people stronger than its neighbors, possessing wider views
and sympathies, and more varied tastes — a people better calcu-
lated than its neighbors to form a nucleus round which the
various tribes of the Italic stock might gather themselves.

While the history of individuals at this remote period is
wholly wanting — for such names as Romulus, Remus, Celer,
Titus Tatius, and the like, cannot be regarded as having any
thing more of historic substance than their parallels, Hellen,
Dorus, Ion, Amyclas, Hoples, etc., the heroes eponytni of Greek
legend — it is not impossible to trace out the early character
of the government, the chief features of the constitution, the
principal divisions and subdivisions of classes within the com-
munity, and the rights and privileges attaching to each. Tra-
dition is a trustworthy guide for certain main features ; analogy
and analysis may be allowed to furnish others; for the laws

286 RAWLINSON

of the growth of states are sufficiently well known and suffi-
ciently uniform to make it possible in most cases, where we
have before us a full-grown constitution, to trace it back to
its foundations, and gather a fair knowledge of its history from
the form and character of its several parts.

The known points of the early constitution are the follow-
ing:— The form of government was monarchical. A chief,
called " rex," i. e., " ruler," or " director," stood at the head
of the state, exercising a great, though not an absolute, power
over the citizens. The monarchy was not hereditary, but elec-
tive. When the king died, there was an " interregnum." The
direction of affairs was taken by the Senate or Council, whose
ten chief men (" Decem Primi ") exercised the royal authority,
each in his turn, for five days. It belonged to the Senate to
elect, and to the people to confirm the king. Under the king
was, first of all, an hereditary nobility (" patricii "), members
of certain noble families, not deriving their nobility from the
king, but possessing it by immemorial descent. These noble
families or " houses " (" gentes ") were, prior to the avvoiKta-
fi6<:, one hundred in number ; after the avvoiKcafio^f, two hun-
dred. Each was represented by its chief in the council of the
king (" senatus ") ; and thus the senators were originally one
hundred, afterwards two hundred. All the members of a
" house " had one name (" nomen gentilitium ") ; all might
participate in certain sacred rites (" sacra gentilitia ") ; and
all had certain rights of property in common. All the males
of full age belonging to the nobility possessed the right of at-
tending the public Assembly (" comitia "), where they voted in
ten bodies (" curiae "), each composed of the members of ten
" houses." Each curia had its chief, called " curio ; " and the
Assembly was presided over by the chief of the ten curiones,
who was called " Curio Maximus." Every change of law re-
quired the consent of both the Senate and the Assembly. The
Senate had the right of discussing and voting, but the Assembly
had the right of voting only. The Assembly was also privi-
leged to determine on peace or war ; and if one of its members
appealed to it from the sentence of the king, or of a judge,
it determined the appeal and condemned or acquitted at its
pleasure. In addition to the members of the " gentes," the

ANCIENT HISTORY 287

early Roman state contained two other classes. These were
the Clients and the Slaves. The Slaves resembled persons of
their class in other communities; but the Clients were a pe-
culiar institution. They were dependents upon the noble
" houses," and personally free, but possessed of no political
privileges, and usually either cultivated the lands of their " pa-
trons," or carried on a trade under their protection. They re-
sembled to a considerable extent the " retainers " of the Middle
Ages.

Under this constitution, Rome flourished for a period which
is somewhat vague and indefinite, without the occurrence of
any important change. According to one tradition, a double
monarchy was tried for a short time, in order that the two ele-
ments of the state — the Roman and the Sabine (or the Ramnes
and the Tities) — might each furnish a ruler from their own
body. But the experiment was not tried for very long. In
lieu of it, we may suspect that for a while the principle of alter-
nation was employed, the Romans and the Sabines each in their
turn furnishing a king to the community.

The duplication of the community, which was thus percep-
tible through all ranks, affected also to a considerable extent
the national religion. Not only was there a duplication of the
chief religious officers in consequence of the synoecismus, but
sometimes the duplication extended to the objects of worship,
the deities themselves. Quirinus, for instance, seems to have
been the Sabine Mars, worshipped, like the Latin Mars, by his
own " Flamen " and college of " Salii." Juno was perhaps the
Sabine equivalent of the Latin Diana, another form of the same
name, but in the popular belief a different goddess. In the
ranks of the hierarchy the duplication was more marked. It
can be traced in the college of the Pontifices, in that of the
Augurs, in that of the Vestal Virgins, in the priesthoods of
Mars, and (probably) in the priesthood of Hercules.

The names which tradition assigned to the early Roman
monarchs seem to be fictitious. Romulus, Titus Tatius, and
Numa Pompilius are personifications rather than personages.
We first touch on personal history in the Roman records when
we come to the name of Tullus Hostilius, the fourth, or, omit-
ting Tatius, the third traditional king. There is every reason

288 RAWLINSON

to believe that this monarch actually lived and reigned; his
name was the first that was handed down to posterity, owing
to the fact that he was the first king who effected an important
conquest, and raised Rome from a humble position to one of
dignity and eminence. It is the great glory of Tullus that he
conquered Alba Longa, the chief of the Latin cities, the mother-
city of Rome itself. His conquest probably doubled, or even
tripled, the Roman territory; it prepared the way for that
hegemony of Rome over all Latium to which she owed her
subsequent greatness ; and it largely increased the population
of Rome, and the military strength of the nation. For Tullus
was not content with a simple conquest. Following up the
principle of synoecismus, which had already been found to an-
swer, he destroyed Alba, except its temples, and transferred
the inhabitants to his own capital. He thus greatly strength-
ened the Latin element in the Roman state, and made the Sa-
bines a mere modifying influence in a community essentially
Latin.

The next Roman king whose name has descended to us is
Ancus Martins, who is said to have belonged to the Sabines
or Titles. This monarch appears to have been regarded by the
later Romans as the founder of the Plebeian order. He pur-
sued the policy of Tullus both in making war on neighboring
Latin towns, and in using his victories for the aggrandizement
of his capital by transferring to Rome the populations of
the conquered states. A portion of the new settlers undoubt-
edly became Clients; but the richer and more independent
would decline to take up this relationship, and would be con-
tent with the protection of the king. Hence would come a
sudden augmentation of that free commonalty, which must
always grow up — out of various elements — in all states which
commence, like Rome, with a privileged class of nobles, and
a wholly unprivileged class of retainers or dependents.

The time at which it becomes necessary, or expedient, in such
a community as the Roman, to recognize the existence of the
commonalty in a formal way, by the grant of political or
municipal rights, varies with circumstances within very wide
limits. At Rome the recognition took place early, matters
coming rapidly to a head in consequence of the quick growth

ANCIENT HISTORY 289

of the territory, and especially of the practice, which the kings
pursued, of removing large masses of the conquered popula-
tions to their capital. If, as we are told, Ancus gave up the
entire Aventine Hill, previously uninhabited, to his new set-
tlers, thus assigning to their exclusive occupation a distinct
quarter of the capital, municipal institutions must have been
at the same time granted, for a whole quarter of a town cannot
be surrendered to anarchy. The " Plebs " must at once have
had " aediles," if not " tribunes ; " and a machinery must have
been established for their election, since nomination by the
monarch is not to be thought of. But of the details of An-
cus's regulations, whatever they were, we have no knowledge,
the later arrangements of Servius having not only superseded
but obliterated them.

Among the other acts assigned to Ancus Martins, the most
important are, the extension of the Roman territory to the
sea, and the establishment of the port of Ostia ; the construc-
tion of salt-pans {salincB) in its neighborhood ; the erection of
the " pons sublicius," or " bridge of piles," across the Tiber,
and the occupation of the Janiculan Hill by a strong fort, or
tcte du pont; the draining of some of the low land about the
Seven Hills by the " Fossa Quiritium," and the construction
of the first prison. It would seem that civilization was advanc-
ing with both its advantages and its drawbacks — trade, manu-
factures, and engineering skill on the one hand ; on the other,
crime and its repression.

The next known king of Rome is L. Tarquinius Priscus.
According to the tradition, he was a refugee from the Etruscan
town of Tarquinii ; according to the evidence furnished by his
name and by his acts, he was a Latin, probably belonging to
one of the noble " houses " from Alba. Two important consti-
tutional changes are attributed to him. He raised the ideal
number of the Senate from two hundred to three hundred, by
adding to it the representatives of the " Gentes Minores," or
" Younger Houses " — who can scarcely be different from the
" houses " adopted into the Patrician body from among the
nobles of Alba. If he were himself a member of one of these
" houses," his act would, it is clear, have been thoroughly
natural. He " doubled the equestrian centuries," or, in other

290 RAWLINSON

words, the actual number of the Patrician " houses." The
" houses " had, apparently, so dwindled, that instead of the
ideal number of three hundred, the actual number was but one
hundred and fifty, or thereabouts. Tarquin proposed to add
one hundred and fifty new " houses " from among the nobles
who had settled at Rome after the addition of the Albans ; these
he proposed to add in three new tribes, which were to stand
side by side with the three old tribes of the Ramnes, Titles, and
Luceres. Opposed by the Patricians, who put forward the
augur, Attus Navius, as objector, he yielded so far as to create
no new tribes ; but still he added the new " houses " in three
new half-tribes, attaching them to the old Ramnes, Titles, and
Luceres, but on terms of slight inferiority.

The wars of Tarquinius Priscus were also of importance.
He repulsed a fierce attack of the Sabines, who had crossed
the Anio and threatened Rome itself. He then attacked the
Latin towns on the Upper Tiber and in the angle between the
Tiber and the Anio, and reduced all of them except Momen-
tum. Antemnae, Crustumerium, Ficulea or Ficulnea, Medul-
lia, Caenina, Corniculum, and Cameria were among his con-
quests. After this, towards the close of his reign, he engaged
in a war, on the other side of the Tiber, with the Etruscans,
and gained important successes.

Tarquinius Priscus was distinguished among the kings of
Rome for the number and the character of his great works.
To him is ascribed by the best authorities the Cloaca Maxima,
the most remarkable monument now existing of the regal
period, a construction of the grandest and most massive de-
scription. Connected with the Cloaca, and undoubtedly the
work of the same builder, was a strong and solid quay along
the left bank of the Tiber, which checked the natural inclina-
tion of the river to flow off on that side and to inundate the
low lands about the Palatine and Capitoline Hills. Tarquin
further constructed for the entertainment of the people a " Cir-
cus," or race-course, known as the " Circus Maximus ; " and
he also designed and commenced the great Temple of Jove,
on the Capitoline Hill, which was completed by the last mon-
arch.

Tarquinius Priscus appears to have been succeeded in the

ANCIENT HISTORY 291

kingdom by Servius Tullius. According to the account which
has most verisimiHtude, Servius was an Etruscan, one of a body
of mercenaries whom Tarquin had employed and had settled
in his capital. He took advantage of his position about the
monarch's person to conceal his death for a time, and act in
his name; after which he boldly threw off the mask, and
openly usurped the throne. Having gained considerable suc-
cesses against the Etruscans, he felt himself strong enough
to devise and carry through a complete change of the consti-
tution. Hitherto, the whole political power, except that wield-
ed by the king, had been engrossed by the noble " Houses."
Servius determined to admit all ranks of freemen to the fran-
chise. Taking the existing arrangements of the army as a
groundwork, he constructed a new Assembly (comitia cen~
turiata), in which all free Romans found a place. Dividing
the citizens into " classes " according to the amount of their
property, he then subdivided the " classes " into a larger or
smaller number of " centuries " according to the aggregate
of the property possessed by the " class ; " and to each century,
whatever the number of the persons composing it, he gave
a single vote. The result was that a decidedly preponderating
power was given to the richer classes; but if they differed
among themselves, the poorer classes came in and decided the
point in dispute.

Another important institution ascribed by good authority to
the reign of Servius is that of the local tribes. Hitherto the
only " tribes " in Rome had been those of the Patrician order
— the Ramnes, Titles, and Luceres — ^which were hereditary,
and had no connection with localities. Servius divided the
city into four, and the territory probably into twenty-six dis-
tricts, and formed the land-owners within every such district
into a tribe. Each tribe had the right of meeting and appoint-
ing its own " tribunus," its " aedilis," and probably its " ju-
dex " or " judices." It is doubtful whether the whole body
of the tribes had at first the right of meeting together in one
place ; but ultimately the right was asserted and exercised, the
meeting-place for the whole body being the forum at Rome,
Here were held the " comitia tributa," which were not, per-
haps, exclusively Plebeian, but which came to be so regarded

292

RAWLINSON

from the great preponderance of the Plebeians in the class of
land-owners. The original object of Servius in creating this
organization was perhaps, as much as anything, the assess-
ment and collection of the property-tax (tributuni), which the
tribunes had to levy, collect, and pay into the treasury. He
may also, however, have aimed at contenting the mass of the
Plebeians, by intrusting them to a considerable extent with the
power of self-government.

Servius is also said to have made an allotment of land out of
the public domain to needy Plebeians — an act which greatly
exasperated the Patricians, who had hitherto enjoyed all the
advantage to be derived from such land by means of their
right of occupation (passessio). The land allotted appears to
have lain on the right bank of the Tiber, consisting of tracts
which had been ceded by the Etruscans after their defeat.

According to some authors, it was likewise this king who
raised Rome externally into a new and most important posi-
tion, getting her to be acknowledged as actual head of the
entire Latin confederacy, or at any rate of all but few recal-
citrant towns, such as Gabii. This position was undoubtedly
held by Rome at the close of the monarchy ; and it may have
been first assumed in the reign of Servius. The position was
not exactly that which had been occupied by Alba. Alba had
been one of the thirty cities, exercising a presidency over her
sister states, which gave her a superiority of rank and dignity,
but no real control over the federation. Rome was never one
of the Latin cities. Her position was that of a " separate state,
confronting the league," equal to it, or even superior to it in
power, and when accepted as a close ally, necessarily exercising
a protectorate. By the terms of the treaty, equality between
Rome and Latium was jealously insisted upon; but, practi-
cally, Rome was paramount, and directed the policy of the
league at her pleasure.

An extension of the city of Rome accompanied this advance
in her territorial influence and in her dignity. The original
" Roma quadrata " was confined to a single hill, the Palatine,
of which perhaps it occupied only the north-western half. From
this centre the town spread to the neighboring heights, the
Esquiline on the north-east, and the Ccelian on the south-east,

ANCIENT HISTORY 293

whereon suburbs g^ew up, perched upon eminences, which
together with the Palatine were seven in number, and consti-
tuted the primitive " Septimontium." The Rome which had
these Hmits was confronted by a separate settlement, probably
Sabine, on the hills (" coUes ") directly to the north, the Capi-
toline, Quirinal, and Viminal. But after a while the two com-
munities coalesced ; and the Rome of Tullus probably included
the houses both of the " Montani " and the " CoUini," or those
of the " Mount-men " and the " Hill-men." Ancus added a
settlement on the Aventine, so completing the later " Septi-
montium." It remained, however, for Servius to inclose the
various eminences, and a considerable space between and be-
yond them, within a single continuous line of wall. It is sig-
nificative of the greatness of the Roman state at this time, that
the " walls of Servius " sufficed for the city down to the time
of Aurelian.

It is said that Servius, towards the close of a long reign,
began to fear for the stability of his institutions, and planned
measures which would, he hoped, secure their continuance.
He intended to abdicate, before doing so presiding at the elec-
tion of two magistrates by the free votes of the people assembled
in their centuries (comitia centuriata), who should be under-
stood to be appointed to their ofhce, not for life, but only
for a single year. It should be their business, before the end
of the year, to hold an assembly for the election of their suc-
cessors; and thus the state would have passed, without vio-
lence or revolution, under the government of popular annual
magistrates. The office of chief magistrate was, it is probable,
to be open to both orders. But the members of the " houses,"
disgusted at this prospect, frustrated the monarch's plans by
anticipating them. Before Servius could effect the changes
which he had designed, they broke out in open revolt, mur-
dered the aged monarch in the Senate-house, and placed a
Tarquin, the son of the former king of the same name, on the
throne.

L. Tarquinius Superbus, the last king of Rome, having
gained his crown by the sole favor of the Patricians, acted
no doubt in some respects oppressively towards the other
order. He set aside at once the whole constitution of Ser-

294

RAWLINSON

vius, and restored that which had existed under the earlier
kings. But it may be questioned whether his oppression of
the commonalty ever proceeded farther than this. Some writ-
ers represent him as grinding down the people by task-work
of a grievous and distasteful kind, and then, when they mur-
mured, banishing them from Rome to distant colonies. But
the works which seem to be rightfully assigned to the second
Tarquin are not of such a character as to imply servile or
grinding labor. Their object was most probably the con-
tentation of the poorer classes, who obtained by means of them
constant employment at good wages. And the planting of
colonies was always a popular measure, involving, as it did of
necessity, an allotment of fresh lands to needy persons. Again,
the " cloacae " of Superbus, and his construction of perma-
nent stone seats in the Circus Maximus, were for the advantage
of the lower classes of the citizens.

The real " tyranny " of Superbus was over the Patricians.
It cannot have commenced very early in his reign. When
however, he felt himself securely settled upon the throne, when
he had made himself fairly popular with the bulk of the com-
munity, when, by the vigor of his external administration, he
had acquired a reputation, and perhaps an amount of military
strength which made him careless of offending the " houses,"
he ceased to respect the rights of the privileged class, and, dis-
pensing with their assistance in the government, took the com-
plete direction of affairs into his own hands. Perhaps this was
not much more than earlier monarchs had done, when they felt
themselves fairly established. But the spirit of the nobles was
higher than it had formerly been. They had recently slain one
king and set up another. They viewed Tarquin as their creat-
ure, and were indignant that he should turn against them.
Still, had the tyranny of the monarch been merely political;
had their persons and the honor of their families remained
secure, it is quite possible that no outbreak would have oc-
curred. But Tarquin, suspicious of their intentions, com-
menced a series of prosecutions. He had charges brought
against the most powerful Patricians, and took cognizance of
them himself. Disallowing the right of appeal, he punished
numbers by death or exile. Finally, the outrage upon a noble

ANCIENT HISTORY 295

Patrician matron woke the smouldering discontent into a
flame. Rebellion broke out ; and, the monarch having sought
safety in flight, the Patrician order, with the tacit acquiescence
of the Plebeians, revolutionized the government.

The vigor of Tarquin's administration to the last is indicated
by the " Treaty with Carthage," which he must have been
negotiating at the time of his dethronement. The story of
his dealings with Turnus Herdonius seems to indicate that he
held a position of more authority with respect to the Latin
league than had been occupied by Servius. And the terms
used with respect to the Latins in the treaty above mentioned
confirm this view. The conquest of Gabii in his reign is prob-
ably a fact, though the circumstances of the conquest may be
fictitious.

The great works of Tarquin were the Capitoline Temple, the
branch cloacce which drained into the Cloaca Maxima, the seats
in the Circus Maximus, and perhaps the Cyclopian wall still
existing at Signia.

The chronology of the kingly period at Rome is extremely
uncertain. Traditionally the period was reckoned at either
240 or 244 years. To Romulus were assigned 37 years; to
Numa, 39 (or 43) ; to Tullus, 32 ; to Ancus, 24 ; to Tarquin I.,
38; to Servius, 44; to Tarquin IL, 25; and an "interreg-
num " of a year was counted between Romulus and Numa.
It has been pointed out that the average duration of the reigns
(35 years nearly) is improbably long; and that the numbers
bear in many points the appearance of artificial manipulation.
On the earlier numbers in the list, and therefore upon the total,
no dependence at all can be placed ; for neither Romulus nor
Numa can be regarded as real personages. There is reason
to believe that the " regifugium " took place in or about the
year B.C. 508. Perhaps we may accept the traditions with re-
spect to the later kings so far as to believe that the reigns of
the last three monarchs covered the space of about a century,
and those of the two preceding them the space of about half
a century. The time that the monarchy had lasted before Tul-
lus was probably unknown to the Romans at the period when
history first began to be written.

396 RAWLINSON

SECOND PERIOD.

From the Foundation of the Republic to the Commencement
of the Samnite Wars, B.C. 508 to 340.*

The interest of the Roman history during the whole of this
period belongs mainly to the internal affairs of the Republic,
the struggle between the orders, the growth of the constitution
and of the laws ; secondarily only, and by comparison, slightly,
to the external affairs, wars, treaties, alliances, and conquests.
With the three exceptions of the first Latin War, the Veientine
contest, and the great attack of Gauls, the wars are unevent-
ful and unimportant. The progress made is slight. It may
be questioned whether at the close of the period Terminus has
advanced in any direction beyond the point which it had
reached under the kings. The relations of Rome to Latium
are certainly less close and less to the advantage of Rome at
the close of the period than at its commencement ; and thus
far, the power of the Roman state is diminished rather than
augmented.

The internal changes during the period are, on the contrary,
of the highest interest and importance. They include the es-
tablishment of the Plebeian Tribunate, the Decemviral consti-
tution and legislation, the institution of the Censorship, the
experiments of the First and Second Military Tribunates, the
re-establishment of the Consulship with the proviso that one
consul should be a Plebeian, the infringement of the proviso,
and the whole series of the early agrarian enactments and dis-
turbances. There is no portion of the constitutional history
of any ancient state which has a deeper interest than this— •

* Sources. The most copious authorities are, as before, Livy (books
ii.-vii.), and Dionysius (books v.-xi. and fragments of books xii.-xx.);
to which may be added Phitarch, in his lives of Poplicola, Coriolanus,
and Camillus; Diodorus Siculus (books xi.-xvi.); and the fragments
of Appian, and Dio Cassius. Occasional notices of the period, mostly
of great value, are also found in Polybius. For the chronology, the
best authority is the important monument dug up on the site of the
Forum, and generally known as the Fasti Capitolini, which, so far as
it goes, is invaluable.

ANCIENT HISTORY

297

none from which lessons of greater value can be learnt. A
certain amount of obscurity rests, indeed, upon many points,
on which we should be glad to have clearer and more certain
knowledge; but, despite this drawback, the history is in the
highest degree instructive, and will well reward the study of
all those who love both order and freedom.

The constitution established on the expulsion of Tarquin
was, in part, the actualization of the ideal of Servius, in part
an enlargement of that ideal, conceived in the same spirit.
Servius had designed to intrust the government of the state
to two annual magistrates elected by the free voice of the cen-
turies, and had made the centuries, in which all freemen were
enrolled, the recognized Assembly of the Roman people. He
had given the non-burghers generally the rights of municipal
self-government ; of the election of their own " tribunes,"
" aediles," and " judges ; " and of the assessment and collec-
tion of their own taxes. But this, so far as appears, was all.
The leaders of the revolution of B.C. 508 went farther. They
restored the constitution of Servius, and they added to it.
Two " praetors," or " consuls," were elected by the free voice
of the centuries, according to a form of proceedings which
Servius had left behind him in writing; and one of the first
pair of consuls was a non-burgher or Plebeian. The Senate,
which had dwindled under the later kings, partly from natural
causes, partly by the deliberate policy of the tyrant, was com-
pleted to its ideal number of 300, by the addition of 164 life-
members (" conscripti "), chosen from the richest of the
" equites," of whom a considerable number were Plebeians.
The right of appeal, suspended under the last king, was re-
vived, and was so enlarged as to include all freemen. Thus,
at the outset, the new constitution wore the appearance, at
any rate, of equality. No sharp line of demarcation was drawn
between the two orders in respect of personal freedom, or ad-
missibility to political privilege ; and it is not too much to say
that, if the spirit which animated the Patrician body in B.C.
508 had continued to prevail, contentions and struggles be-
tween the two orders would never have arisen.

But this fair prospect was soon clouded over. The Patri-
cians had been induced to make the concessions above enu-

298 RAWLINSON

merated to the other Order, not from any sense of justice, but
through fear of Tarquin and his partisans, who were laboring
to bring about a restoration. Of this there was for a time con-
siderable danger. There was a royalist party among the Patri-
cians themselves ; and both the Etruscans and the Latins were
inclined to espouse the quarrel of the deposed king. When,
however, this peril was past, when the chiefs of the royalist
faction were banished or executed, when the Etruscans had
met a resistance which they had not counted on, and the Latins
had sustained the complete defeat of the Lake Regillus, the
policy of the Patricians changed. No Plebeian was allowed
to enjoy the consulship after Brutus, and by degrees it grew
to be forgotten that any but Patricians had ever been regarded
as eligible. No plan was adopted by which Plebeians could
obtain regular entrance into the Senate; and, as their life-
members died off, the council of the nation was once more
closed to them. The whole power of the government was en-
grossed by the Patrician order ; which, finding itself free from
any check, naturally became overbearing and oppressive.

The imminent danger of a restoration at one time is indi-
cated by the story, which Livy tells, of the origin of the Dic-
tatorship. Such an office was evidently no part of the original
idea of the constitution ; but was exactly what might naturally
have been devised to meet an emergency. If the circumstances
were such as Livy mentions, the first Dictator must have been
named by the Senate. In after-times it is certain that the Sen-
ate claimed the right of nomination, though practically they
were generally satisfied to select the consul who should nomi-
nate.

The loss of political privilege would not, it is probable, by
itself, have called forth any active movement on the part of
the commonalty. It required the stimulus of personal suffer-
ing to stir up the law-loving Roman to offer any resistance to
constituted authority. This stimulus was found in the harsh
enforcement, not long after the commencement of the Repub-
lic, of the law of debtor and creditor — a law which, under the
circumstances of the time, pressed heavily on vast numbers
of the community, and threatened to deprive them of their
personal freedom, if not even of their lives.

ANCIENT HISTORY 299

The operation of the law of debt acquired political impor-
tance chiefly from the large number of the debtors at this period
of the history ; and it is therefore necessary to inquire what
were the circumstances which caused the wide prevalence of
indebtedness at the time — a prevalence which threatened revo-
lution. Now, in the first place, nothing is more clear than that
the change from the Monarchy to the Republic was accom-
panied by a diminution in the power and prestige of Rome,
which sank from a position of pre-eminence among the central
Italian nations to one of comparative insignificance. The Lat-
ins profited by the occasion to reclaim their complete inde-
pendence ; the Etruscans assumed an aggressive attitude, and
an Etruscan monarch, Lars Porsenna, appears to have actually
for a term of years held Rome in subjection. This yoke was
indeed shaken off after a while ; but a permanent result of the
subjection remained in the loss of almost all the territory on
the right bank of the Tiber. The Romans whose lands lay
on that side of the river thus lost them; while at the same
time the separation between Rome and Latium laid the Roman
territory on the south side of the river open to incursions.
The Sabines and Oscans plundered and ravaged freely; the
crops were ruined, the farm buildings and implements de-
stroyed, the cattle carried off. A general impoverishment was
the natural consequence ; and this would of course be felt most
by the poorest classes, and especially by those whose small
plots of land were their sole means of sustenance.

The poverty thus produced was further aggravated, i. By
the exaction of taxes, which by the Roman system were as-
sessed upon individuals, not for a single year, but for a term
of five years, and had to be paid for that term, whether the
property on which they were levied remained in the possession
of the individual or not ; 2. By the high rate of interest, which,
under the peculiar circumstances of the time, rose probably
from the normal rate of 10 per cent, (unciarium fccnus) to such
rates as 30, 40, or perhaps even 50 per cent. ; 3. By the non-
payment of the rents due to the treasury from the possessores,
the withholding of which caused the property-tax (tributum)
to become a serious burden ; 4. By the cessation of the system
of allotments (divisio agrorum) instituted by Servius, which was

300

RAWLINSON

intended to compensate the Plebeians for their exclusion from
the right of possessio.

When the sufferings of the poorer classes had reached to a
certain height from the cruel enforcements of the laws con-
cerning debt, murmurs and indignant outcries began to be
heard. At first, however, the opposition of the discontented
took a purely legal shape. The Roman was a volunteer army,
not a conscription ; and the Plebeians had been wont, at the
call of the consuls, freely to offer their services. Now they
declined to give in their names unless upon the promise of a
redress of grievances. Promises to this effect were made and
broken. The Plebeians then, driven to despair, " seceded " —
that is to say, they withdrew from Rome in a body, and pro-
ceeded to prepare for themselves new abodes across the Anio,
intending to found a new city separate from the burgesses,
where they might live under their own sole government. Such
a step was no doubt revolutionary ; it implied the complete dis-
ruption of the state ; but it was revolution of a kind which in-
volved no bloodshed. The burghers, however, seeing in the
step taken the ruin of both orders — for Rome divided against
herself must have speedily succumbed to some one or other
of her powerful neighbors — felt compelled to yield. The Plebs
required as the conditions of their return that all debts of per-
sons who could prove themselves insolvent should be can-
celled; that all persons in the custody of their creditors on
account of debt should be set at liberty; and that certain
guardians of the Plebeian order should be annually elected by
the nation at large, whose persons should be sacred, who should
be recognized as magistrates of the nation, and whose special
business should be to defend and protect from injury all Plebe-
ians appealing to them. These were the famous " Tribuni
Plebis," or " Tribunes of the Commons," who played so im-
portant a part in the later history of the Republic. Their
original number is uncertain ; but it would seem to have been
either five or two.

It is evident that the economical portion of this arrangement
very insufficiently met the difficulty of the existing poverty;
and there can be little doubt that, besides the formal provisos
above mentioned, there was an understanding that the Plebe-

ANCIENT HISTORY 301

ian grievances should be redressed by an equitable system of
allotments. Such a system was advocated shortly afterwards,
B.C. 484, by Sp. Cassius, one of the consuls under whom the
Plebs returned from their secession, but was violently opposed
by the bulk of the Patrician order, and cost its advocate his life.
Still, from time to time, concessions of this kind were made,
to keep the Plebeians in good humor; and gradually, as the
territory once more grew in size, considerable portions of it
were parcelled out to small proprietors.

But a new character was given to the struggle between the
orders by the tribunate, which enabled the wealthier Plebeians,
whose especial grievance was their exclusion from the chief
offices in the state, to turn the efforts of their order to the ob-
taining of equal political privileges and thus to initiate a contest
which lasted for above a century. The first step taken in ad-
vance was by the law of Publilius Volero (B.C. 470), the main
importance of which was that it assumed the initiative in legis-
lation, hitherto exclusively in the hands of the other Order.
When the attempt thus made to legislate in a matter of public
importance succeeded, when, by the sanction of the Senate and
Patricians, the rogatio Publilia became law, the contest was vir-
tually decided; a door was opened by means of which an
entrance might be effected into the very citadel of the constitu-
tion ; all that was necessary was sufficient patience and perse-
verance, a determination in spite of all obstacles to press
steadily forward to the required end, and to consent perma-
nently to no compromise that should seriously interfere with
the great principle of equal rights.

The Plebeians, victorious in this first struggle, did not long
rest upon their oars. In B.C. 460 the tribune, C. Terentilius
Harsa, brought forward a proposition, the real object of which
was a complete change of the constitution. He proposed the
creation of a board of commissioners, half Patrician, half Ple-
beian, whose duties should be to codify the existing laws, to
limit and define the authority of the consuls, and to establish
a constitution just and equitable to both orders. The proposi-
tion was opposed with the utmost determination and violence.
Even at the last, it was not formally carried; but, after ten
years of the most vehement strife, after Rome, through the con-

30«

RAWLINSON

tentions between the orders, had several times been nearly
taken by the Volscians, and had once been actually occupied
by a band of adventurers under a Sabine named Appius Her-
donius, called in by some of the more violent of the Patrician
body, the nobles virtually yielded — they agreed that that
should be done which the law proposed, but required that it
should be done in another way. The nation, assembled in It's
centuries, should freely choose the ten commissioners to whom
so important a task was to be intrusted, and who would, more-
over, constitute a provisional government, superseding for the
time all other magistrates. The Plebeians consented ; and the
natural consequence was that ten Patricians were chosen — Pa-
tricians, however, mostly of known moderation, who might be
expected to perform their task prudently and justly.

The First Decemvirs did not disappoint the expectations
formed of them. In their codification of the laws they did little
but stereotype the existing practice, putting, for the most part,
into a written form what had previously been matter of prece-
dent and usage. In some matters, however, where the law
was loose and indeterminate, they had to give it definiteness
and precision by expressing for the first time its provisions
in writing. The code of the Twelve Tables — " fons omnis
publici privatique juris " — which dates from this time, was a
most valuable digest of the early Roman law, and, even in
the fragmentary state in which it has come down to us, de-
serves careful study.

The fragments of the code have been published by several
writers, as by Haubold in his " Institutionum juris Romani
privati Lineamenta," Lipsiae, 1826; and by Dirksen in his
" Uebersicht der bisherigen Versuche zur Kritik und Herstell-
ung des Textes der Zwolf-Tafel-Fragmente," Leipzig, 1824.
The subject has been well treated by Arnold in his " Roman
History," Vol. I., Chap. XIV. The following are the Tables,
as given by Dirksen, the original form of the language being
only partially preserved :

ANCIENT HISTORY 303

LAWS OF THE TWELVE TABLES.
FIRST TABLE.

SL IN. IVS. VOCAT. WL IT. ANTESTATOR. lOlTVR. EM. CAPITO.

SI. CALVITVR. PEDEUVE. STRVIT. MANVM. ENDOIACITO.

81. MORBVS. AEVITASVE. VITIVM. ESCIT. QVU IN. IVS. VOCABIT. IVMENTVM. DATO.

SI. NOLET. ARCERAM. NE. STERNITO.
ASSIDVO. VINOEX. ASSIDVVS. ESTO. PROLETARIO. QVOl. QVIS. VOLET. VINDEX.

ESTO.
REM. VBl. PAGVNT. ORATO.
NI. PAGVNT. IN. COMITIO. AVT. IN. FORO. ANTE. MERIDIEM. CAVSAM. CONIICITa

QVOM. PERORANT. AMBO. PRAESENTES.
POST. MERIDIEM. PRAESENTI. STLITEM. ADDICITO.
SOU OCCASVS. SVPREMA. TEMPESTAS. ESTO.
— ^VAOES. — SVBVADES. —

SECOND TABLE.

MORBVS.— SONTICVS. — STATVS. DIES. CVM. HOSTE. — QVID. HORVIC FVIT. VNVM,

IVDICI. ARBITROVE. REG. VE, DIES. DIFFISVS, ESTO.
CV. TESTIMONIVM. DEFVERIT. IS. TERTIIS. DIEBVS. OB. PORTVM. OBVAGVLATVM.

ITO.

THIRD TABLE.

AERIS. CONFESSL REBVSQVE. IVRE. IVDICATIS. TRIGINTA. DIES. IVSTL 8VNTO.

POST. DEINDE. MANVS. INIECTIO. ESTO. IN. IVS. DVCITO.

KI. IVDICATVM. FACIT. AVT. QVIPS. ENDO. EM. IVRE. VINDICIT. SECVM. DVCITO.

VINCITO. AVT. NERVO. AVT. COMPEDIBVS. QVINDECIM. PONDO. NE. MAIORE. AVT.

SL VOLET. MINORE. VINCITO.
SI. VOLET. SVO. VIVITO. NI. SVO. VIVIT. QVL EM. VINCTVM. HABEBIT. LIBRAS.

FARRIS. ENDO. DIES. DATO. SL VOLET. PLVS. DATO.
TERTIIS. NVNDINIS, PARTIS. SECANTO. SI. PLVS. MINVSVE. SECVERVNT. SE. FRAVDE.

ESTO.
AOVERSVS. HOSTEM. AETERNA. AVCTORITA3.

FOURTH TABLE.

SL PATER. FILIVM. TER. VENVM. DVIT. FILIVS. A. PATRE. LIBER. ESTO.

FIFTH TABLE.

VTI. LEGASSIT. SVPER. PECVNIA. TVTELAVE. SVAE. REI. ITA. IVS. ESTO.

SI. INTESTATO. MORITVR. CVL SWi HERES. NEC SIT. ADGNATV8. PROXIMV&

FAMILIAM. HABETO.
SL AGNATVS. NEC ESCIT. GENTILIS. FAMILIAM. NANCITOR.
SL FVRIOSVS. EST. AGNATORVM. GENTILIVMQVE. IN. EG. PECVNXAQVE. EIVS.

POTESTAS, ESTO. — ^AST. EI. CVSTOS. NEC ESCIT.
EX. EA. FAMILIA IN. EAM. FAMILIAM.

SIXTH TABLE.

CVM. NBXVM. FACIET. MANCIPIVMQVE. VTI. LINGVA. HVUCVPASSIT. ITA. IV& ESTa
SL QVL IN. IVRE. MANVM. CONSERVNT.

TIONVM. IVNCTVM. AEDIBVS. VINEAEQVE. ET. CONCAPET. NE. SOLVITO.
QVAKDOQVE. SARPTA. DONEC. OEMPTA. ESVNT.

3«>4

RAWLINSON

SEVENTH TABLE.

— HORTVS. — HEREDIVM. — TVGVRIVM. —

SI. IVRGANT. —

SI. AQVA. PLVVIA. NOCET. —

EIGHTH TABLE.

SI. MEMBRVM. RVPIT. NI. CVM. EO. PACIT. TALIO. ESTO.

SI. INIVRIAM. FAXIT. ALTERI. VIGINTI. QVINQVE. AERIS. POENAE. SVNTO.

— RVPITIAS. — SARCITO.

— QVl. FRVGES. EXCANTASSIT. — NEVE. ALIENAM. SEGETEM. PELLEXERIS. —

SI. NOX. FVRTVM. FACTVM. SIT. SI. IM. OCCISIT. IVRE. CAESVS. ESTO.

SI. ADORAT. FVRTO. QVOD. NEC. MANIFESTVM. ESCIT. —

PATRONVS. SI. CLIENTI. FRAVDEM. FECERIT. SACER. ESTO.

QVI. SE. SIERIT. TESTARIER. LIBRIPENSVE. FVERIT. NI. TESTIMONIVM. FARIATVR.

IMPROBVS. INTESTABILISQVE. ESTO.
QVI. MALVM. CARMEN. INCANTASSET. MALVM. VENENVM.

TENTH TABLE.

IIOMINEM. MORTVVM. IN. VRBE. NE. SEPELITO. NEVE. VRII
HOC. PLVS. NE. FACITO. — ROGVM. ASCIA. NE. POLITO.

MVLIERES. GENAS. NE. RADVNTO. NEVE. LESSVM. FVNERIS. ERGO. HABENTO.
HOMINI. MORTVO. NE. OSSA. LEGITO. QVO. POST. FVNVS. FACIAT.
QVI. CORONAM. PARIT. IPSE. PECVNIAVE. EIVS. VIRTVTIS. ERGO DIVITOR. EI.
NEVE. AVRVM. ADDITO. QVOI. AVRO. DENTES. VINCTI. ESCVNT. AST. IM. CUM. ILLO.
SEPELIRE. VREREVE. SE. FRAVDE. ESTO.

TWELFTH TABLE.

SI. SERWS. FVRTVM. FAXIT. NOXIAMVE. NOCVIT. —

SI. VINDICIAM. FALSAM. TVLIT SI. VELIT. IS TOR. AR3ITROS.

DATO. EORVM. ARPITRIO FRVCTVS. DVPLIONE. DAMNVM. DECIDITO.

But the main work of the Decemvirs was the constitution
which they devised and sought to establish. In lieu of the
double magistracy, half Patrician and half Plebeian, which had
recently divided the state, and had threatened actual disrup-
tion, the Decemvirs instituted a single governmental body —
a board of ten, half Patrician and half Plebeian, which was to
supersede at once the consulate and the tribunate, and to be
the sole Roman executive. The centuries were to elect ; and
the Patrician assembly was, probably, to confirm the election.
It is suspected that the duration of the office was intended to
exceed a year ; but this is perhaps uncertain.

Fairly as this constitution was intended, and really liberal as

ANCIENT HISTORY 305

were its provisions, as a practical measure of relief it failed
entirely. One member of the board, Appius Claudius, obtained
a complete ascendency over his colleagues, and persuaded
them, as soon as they came into office, to appear and act as
tyrants. The abolition of all the other high magistracies had
removed those checks which had previously restrained consuls,
tribunes, and even dictators; there was now no power in the
state which could legally interfere to prevent an abuse of
authority, unless it were the Senate ; and the Senate was on
the whole inclined to prefer a tyranny which did not greatly
affect its own members, to the tumults and disorders of the
last forty years. Rather than see the tribunate restored, the
Patricians, and their representatives the senators, were pre-
pared to bear much ; and thus there was small hope of redress
from this quarter.

It was on the Plebeians that the yoke of the Decemvirs
pressed most heavily. It was supposed that, as they had now
no legal mode of even making their complaints heard, since
there were no tribunes to summon the tribes to meet, they at
any rate might be oppressed and insulted with absolute im-
punity. Accordingly, they were subjected to every kind of
wrong and indignity — the Decemvirs and their partisans plun-
dered them, outraged their persons, heaped contumely upon
them, and finally attacked them in the tenderest of all points —
the honor of their families. Then at length resistance was
aroused. As the wrongs of Lucretia had armed the Patricians
ag^nst Tarquin, so those of Virginia produced a rising of the
Plebeians against Appius. The armies, which were in the field,
revolted: the commons at home rose; and, when the Senate
still declined to take any active steps against the Decemvirs,
the whole mass of the Plebeians once more occupied the Mons
Sacer. The walls of a new city began to rise ; the Roman state
was split in two ; its foreign enemies, seeing their opportunity,
assumed a threatening attitude; destruction was imminent;
when at last the Senate yielded. Appius and his colleagues
were required by a decree (senatusconsultum) to resign their
offices, and, having now no physical force on which they could
fall back, they submitted, and went through the formalities of
abdication.

3o6

RAWLINSON

Forced hurriedly to extemporize a government, the state fell
back upon that form which had immediately preceded the es-
tablishment of the First Decemvirate. It was adopted, how-
ever, with certain modifications. Prior to the Decemvirate for
above thirty years, the Patricians had claimed and exercised the
right of appointing by their own exclusive assembly one of
the two consuls. It was impossible at the present conjuncture
to maintain so manifestly unfair an usurpation. The free elec-
tion of both consuls was consequently restored to the cen-
turies. The tribunate of the Plebs was re-established exactly
as it had existed before the Decemvirate. But the position of
the other Plebeian magistrates was improved. The Plebeian
" aediles " and judges were allowed the " sacrosanct " charac-
ter ; and the former were made custodians of all decrees passed
by the Senate, which it henceforth became impossible for the
magistrates to ignore or falsify. Further, a distinct recognition
was made of the right of the tribunes to consult the tribes on
matters of public concern, and thus initiate legislation — a right
hitherto resting merely upon grounds of reason and prescrip-
tion.

In relinquishing temporarily their claim to a share in the
supreme magistracy for the purpose of securing at any cost
the restoration of the much-valued tribunate, the Plebeians
were far from intending to profess themselves satisfied with
the exclusive possession of high office by the other party. They
expected, perhaps, that some proposition for giving them a
certain share in the government would emanate from the Patri-
cians themselves, who were not universally blind to the justice
of their claims. But, as time went on and no movement in this
direction was made, the Plebeian leaders once more took up
the question, and in B.C. 442, C. Canuleius, one of the tribunes,
brought forward two separate but connected laws, one opening
the consulship to the Plebeian Order, the other legalizing inter-
marriage between Patricians and Plebeians, and providing
that the children should follow the rank of the father. Both
laws encountered a strenuous opposition; and according to
one authority, no concession was made until the Plebs once
more seceded, this time across the Tiber to the Janiculan Hill,
when the " Intermarriage Law " (lex de connubio) was passed,

ANCIENT HISTORY 307

and, in lieu of the other, a compromise was effected between
the Orders. It was agreed to put the consulate in commission,
substituting for the double rule of two equal magistrates, which
had hitherto prevailed, a board of (probably) five persons* of
unequal rank, among whom the consular powers were to be
parcelled out. The duties with respect to the revenue, and the
arrangement of the roll of the Senate, of the knights, and of
the citizens generally in the centuries, which had hitherto been
exercised by the consuls, were separated off and made over to
two " Censors " elected by the centuries from among the nobles
only. The remaining duties of the consuls were consigned to
three " military tribunes," also elected by the centuries, but
from the Patricians and Plebeians indifferently. The latter
officers were to be annual ; the former were to hold office for
a term of five years.

The working of this constitution was extremely unsatisfac-
tory to the Plebeians. By means of the irregular alternation
of the consulate with the military tribunate, at least half the
supreme magistracies were monopolized by the nobles with-
out the Plebeians being able even to be candidates. With re-
spect to the other half, it might have been thought that they
could have avenged themselves. But practically it was found
that only on rare occasions, under circumstances of peculiar
excitement, could the centuries be induced to elect a Plebeian
candidate. The Patricians by their own votes and those of
their clients in the centuries of the first class had almost
the complete control of the elections ; and during nearly forty
years, at the most three Plebeians obtained a place in the
college. Even then their position was insecure. The colleges
of sacred lore might be called upon to inquire whether some
accidental informality at the election had not rendered it in-
valid. Of the three Plebeian tribunes elected under the con-
stitution of B.C. 442, one was made to resign in his third month
of office, because the augural tent had not been pitched rightly.

Nor were the Plebeians compensated for their disappoint-

♦ Mommsen says "eight" — two censors, and six military tribunes;
but there is no instance of a board of six military tribunes till B.C. 402,
forty years later; after which time there is no instance of a board con-
taining less than six.

3o8

RAWLINSON

ment with respect to the constitution of B.C. 442 by mild or
liberal treatment in other respects during the forty years that
it lasted (B.C. 442 to 402). The dignity of the censorship was
indeed lessened by the ^Emilian law, which diminished the
duration of the office from five years to eighteen months ; but
any advantage which the Plebeians might seem to have gained
in this respect was counterbalanced by the elevation of the
prefect of the city, an exclusively Patrician officer, to the posi-
tion of a colleague of the military tribunes when there were no
censors in office. A demand which the Plebeians made for
a share of the quaestorship was practically eluded in the way
which had now come to be fashionable, by throwing the office
open to both Orders. Requests for allotments of land were
either wholly rejected, or answered by niggardly assignment's
of two " jugera " to a man in portions of the territory very
open to attack on the part of an enemy. The state-rents were
generally withheld by the " possessores ; " and, to make up the
deficiency in the revenue, the property-tax was unduly aug-
mented. The demand of the tribunes, that the soldiers should
receive pay during the time that they were on active service,
was not complied with; nor was any thing done to alleviate
the pressure caused by the high rate of interest.

Thus the Plebeians, though, by the letter of the constitution,
they had made certain not inconsiderable gains since the abo-
lition of the Decemvirate, were scarcely better contented with
their position in the state than they had been when Terentilius
or when Canuleius commenced their agitations. And the Pa-
tricians were quite aware of their feelings. Accordingly, when,
about B.C. 403, the military position of Rome among her neigh-
bors had become such as to justify the nation in entering upon
a more important war than any hitherto waged by the Repub-
lic, and it was clear that success would depend very much
upon the heartiness and unanimity with which the whole nation
threw itself into the struggle, the Patricians themselves came
forward with proposals for a change in the military tribunate,
and probably one also in the censorship, which had for their
object the better contentation of the other Order. A new con-
stitution was framed ; and at the same time it was agreed that
the state-rents should be carefully collected, and from the

ANCIENT HISTORY 309

money thus obtained regular pay should be g^ven to the sol-
diers, who were now to be called upon to serve the whole, or
nearly the whole, of the year.

The wars of the Republic had hitherto been of minor impor-
tance. After the yoke of Porsenna was thrown off a short and
sharp struggle had supervened with the Latins, who were com-
pelled by Sp. Cassius (B.C. 491), if not to renew their old
treaty, at any rate to enter into a league, offensive and defen-
sive, with the Romans. The Hemicans of the Upper Liris
country were soon afterwards (B.C. 484) forced by the same
general to join the alliance. The special object of the league
was to resist the encroachments of the Oscan nations, partic-
ularly the i^qui and Volsci, who were now at the height of
their power. A long struggle with these nations, attended with
very varying success, had followed. Rome had at times been
reduced to great straits. Many Latin cities had been taken
and occupied by the Volscians. But, after above half a century
of almost perpetual contest, the power of the Oscans began
to wane. The confederated Romans, Latins, and Hemicans
recovered most of their lost ground. Tarracina was reoccu-
pied, B.C. 403. At the same time, the pressure of the Sabines
upon Rome, constant in the earlier years of the Republic, had
ceased. A great victory, gained by the consul Horatius, in
B.C. 446, had relieved Rome of this enemy, whose superabun-
dant energfies found for many years an ample scope in South-
em Italy. Under these circumstances of comparative freedom
from any pressing danger, Rome felt that the time was come
when she might make a fresh start in the race for power. She
was cramped for room towards the north and west by the near
vicinity of an important but not very formidable state, Veii.
Having first tested her adversary's strength in a contest for
the possession of that single post which the Etruscans still
held south of the Tiber, namely, Fidenae, and having after some
difficulty been successful so far (B.C. 423), Rome proceeded
in B.C. 402 to enter upon a fresh war with Veii, distinctly in-
tending to effect, if she could, a permanent conquest.

The war with the Veientines, commenced in this spirit,
lasted, according to the tradition, ten years — B.C. 402 to 392.
Rome now for the first time maintained in the field continu-

3IO RAWLINSON

ously an armed force, thus laying the foundation of that " stand-
ing army " to which she ultimately owed most of her greatness.
She made her attack on the powerful Etruscan state at a fortu-
nate time. Almost contemporaneously with her first serious
aggressions upon the southernmost city of the confederacy
began that terrible inroad from the North which utterly shat-
tered and broke up the Etruscan power in the plain of the Po,
and first alarmed and then seriously crippled the strength of
the Cis-Apennine league. Had not the Gallic invasion occu-
pied the whole attention of the Northern Etruscans, it is prob-
able that they would have made common cause with the threat-
ened Veil, in which case the war would scarcely have terminated
as it did in the capture and ruin of the city.

The successful issue of the war with Veii encouraged the
Romans to fresh efforts in the same direction. Capena was
conquered and her territory absorbed in the year after Veii fell.
Then Falerii was attacked and forced to cede some of her lands.
The neighboring towns of Nepete and Sutrium submitted at
the same time, and became Roman dependencies. Finally, war
was declared against the Volsinians, and the Roman arms were
carried beyond the Ciminian mountains. Here victory was
again with the aggressors ; but the success failed to bring any
increase of territory.

But now the progress of Rome received a sudden and ter-
rible check. The Gallic hordes, which had begun to swarm
across the Alps about B.C. 400, and had conquered Northern
Etruria nearly at the time when the Romans took Veii, after
a brief pause crossed the Apennines, and spread like a flood
over Central Italy. Whether Rome gave them any special
provocation, or no, is doubtful. At any rate, they poured
down the valley of the Tiber in irresistible force, utterly de-
feated the entire armed strength of the Romans upon the Allia,
captured the city, and burnt almost the whole of it, except the
Capitol. The Capitol itself was besieged for months, but still
held out, when the Gauls, weary of inaction and alarmed for
the safety of their conquests in the plain of the Po, consented,
on the payment of a large sum of money, to retire.

It might have been expected that this fearful blow would
have been fatal to the supremacy of Rome among the Italic

ANCIENT HISTORY 311

nations. But the result was otherwise. At first, indeed, con-
sequences followed which brought the Republic into serious
danger, and seemed to menace its existence. The Latins and
Hernicans, who had been united in the closest possible league
with the Romans, the former for above, the latter for not much
less than a century, took the opportunity of Rome's defeat to
declare the league dissolved. The Oscan nations, the Volsci
especially, renewed their attacks. The Etruscans took the
offensive. Rome was saved from immediate destruction by
the genius of Camillus, and then gradually rose ag^in to power
and preponderance by her own inherent energy. To account
for the slightness of the check which the Gallic conquest gave
to her external prosperity, we must bear in mind that the attack
of the Gauls was not really upon Rome alone, or even upon
Rome specially and peculiarly. The first burst of their fury
had fallen on the Etruscans, and had permanently weakened
that important people. Their later irruptions injured the Italic
nations generally, not Rome in particular. The Umbrians,
Sabines, Latins, ^Equi, and Volsci all suffered, perhaps about
equally. Thus Rome, on the whole, succeeded in maintaining
her place among the Italian states ; and, the same causes which
had previously given her a preponderance continuing to work,
she gradually lifted herself up once more above her neighbors.
She warred successfully with the Volscians, and with several
cities of the Latins, which were now leagued with them. She
held her own in Etruria. After an interval of ahvjut a genera-
tion she induced the Latins and compelled the Hernicans to
resume their old position of confederates (B.C. 355) under her
hegemony. Within five-and-thirty years of the destruction of
the city, Rome had fully recovered from all the effects of the
blow dealt by the Gauls ; and, if we take into account the gen-
eral weakness caused by the Gallic ravages, had relatively im-
proved her position.

While Rome thus, on the whole, prospered externally, her
internal condition was also gradually improving. The second
military tribunate was not, indeed, very much more successful
than the first, failing equally to content the aspirations of the
Plebeian Order. Though it gave them a larger proportion of
the high offices, the proportion was still so small — not so much

3ia

RAWLINSON

as one-twelfth — that their dissatisfaction, not unreasonably,
continued. They never obtained the military tribunate ex-
cepting under abnormal circumstances ; and on the single oc-
casion on which they gained the censorship (B.C. 376), it was
wrested from them under a religious pretext. The Patricians
could still, ordinarily, command the votes of the centuries ; and,
if a Plebeian obtained office, it was by Patrician sufferance or
contrivance. Excepting under peculiar circumstances, the
nobles were inclined to grasp as much power as they could;
and hence the Plebeians felt that they had no firm hold on the
constitution, no security for the continuance of even that small
share of office which had practically fallen to them. They
would probably have set themselves to obtain a change in the
constitution many years before the Licinio-Sextian laws were
actually brought forward, had not the Gallic invasion produced
such an extent of poverty and debt as effectually cramped for
a time all Plebeian aspirations, changing the struggle for equal
rights into a struggle for existence.

The first important result of the general prevalency of dis-
tress among the Plebeians was the attempt of M. Manlius.
Less pure and disinterested than his prototype, Spurius Cass-
ius, he made the Plebeian wrongs the stalking-horse of his own
ambition. Partly tempted, partly goaded into crime, he is en-
titled to our pity even though we condemn him. His intentions
were probably at the first honest, and the means that he de-
signed to use legal ; but the opposition which he encountered
drove him to desperate measures, and he became in the end
a dangerous conspirator. Well would it have been for Rome
had she possessed a method, like that which Athens enjoyed in
the ostracism, of securing her own liberties by the temporary
banishment, rather than the death, of a great citizen !

During the Manlian struggle, and immediately after it, some
slight efforts were made by the government to relieve the gen-
eral destitution. In B.C. 382 two thousand Plebeians received
allotments of two and a half jugera at Satricum. Two years
later, colonies were sent out to Nepete in Etruria and to the
Pontine marsh district. But these were mere palliatives, and
in no way met or grappled with the disease. It was necessary,
if the bulk of the Plebeian Order was not to be swept away from

ANCIENT HISTORY 313

the state, becoming the slaves of the Patricians or of foreigners,
that measures should be taken on a large scale, both to meet
the present distress, and to prevent such crises from recurring.

Great difficulties call for, and seem in a way to produce,
great men. Fourteen years after the distress had become con-
siderable owing to the Gallic inroad, two Plebeians of high
rank and great ability, C. Licinius Stolo and L. SextiuSj came
forward with a scheme of legislation skillfully framed so as to
cover all the various heads of Plebeian grievance, and to pro-
vide at once a remedy for the actually existing evils and secur-
ity against future oppression. Considering that there were two
kinds of evil to remedy, political inequality and want, they
framed their measures against both. For the immediate relief
of the needy, they brought forward their " lex de cere alieno"
which provided that whatever had been paid on any debt in
the way of interest should be counted as a repayment of the
principal and deducted from the amount due; and that the
balance remaining, if any, should be demandable only in in-
stallments, which should be spread over the space of three
years. For the prevention of the poverty in future, they pro-
posed their " lex agraria " — which, in the first place, threw
open the right of occupying the public land to the Plebeians ;
in the second, affixed a limit beyond which occupation should
not be carried ; and in the third, required all occupiers to em-
ploy in the cultivation of their farms a certain definite propor-
tion of free labor. For the establishment of the principle of
political equality, they proposed the restoration of the consul-
ship, with the proviso that one of the two consuls should each
year be a Plebeian (lex de consulatti) ; and the equal division of
a sacred office, that of the keepers of the Sibylline books, be-
tween the two Orders {lex de deceniviris sacroriim).

The importance of these laws was immense. They estab-
lished fully the principle of the equality of the two orders, both
as respected sacred and civil office — a principle which, once
admitted, was sure to work itself out to the full in course of
time. They greatly alleviated the existing poverty, and by the
two provisions for extending the right of occupation to Ple-
beians, and compelling the employment of a large amount of
free labor on the public lands, they made considerable provision

31^ RAWLINSON

against extreme poverty in the future. Above all, they se-
cured to the Plebeians a succession of champions in the highest
offices of the State, who would watch over their interests and
protect them against unfair treatment. Naturally, therefore,
being so important, the laws were opposed with the utmost
determination by the other Order. The struggle, according
to some authorities, was of eleven years' duration. It was
probably not until a " secession " had begun, or at any rate
was threatened, that the Patricians yielded, the laws received
the sanction of both the Senate and the Assembly of the nobles,
and a Plebeian consul, L. Sextius, was elected, B.C. 363.

It might have seemed that the struggle between the Orders
would now have come to a close — that when the highest civil,
and one of the highest religious, offices had been once opened
to the Plebeian Order, there remained nothing which the other
Order could regard as worth fighting for. But the fact was
otherwise. Not only were there, now as ever, among the Patri-
cians those who would not yield without a struggle even the
last " rag of privilege ; " but there existed in the body at this
time a party disinclined to view the recent defeat as decisive,
or to accept it as final. During the quarter of a century which
followed on the passage of the Licinio-Sextian laws, it was
uncertain whether or no the Plebeian advance could be main-
tained. A certain amount of reaction set in. For the space
of fourteen years — from B.C. 352 to B.C. 339 — the regular
operation of the Licinio-Sextian constitution was set aside.
Instead of Plebeian consuls following each other in regular
succession year after year, the Fasti show during the fourteen
years seven Plebeian names only, while there are twenty-one
Patrician.

The illegal setting aside of the Licinio-Sextian constitution
could not fail to produce among the more prudent and far-
seeing of the Plebeians violent discontent. If a party in the
State is once allowed to begin the practice of setting the law
at nought, there is no saying where it will stop. The old
champions of the Plebeian cause — the Licinii, Genucii, Publilii,
etc. — must have been violently angered ; and as time went on
and the illegality continued, the bulk of the Order must have
become more and more disgusted with their own renegades

ANCIENT HISTORY 315

and with the Patrician usurpers. These last must have felt,
during the whole time of the usurpation, that they walked upon
a hidden volcano — that a fire might at any moment burst forth
which would imperil the very existence of the community.

It was probably with the view of pacifying and soothing the
discontented, that the Patricians granted during this interval
many boons to the poorer classes. The re-establishment of the
uncial rate of interest (10 per cent.) in B.C. 351, and the subse-
quent reduction of the rate by one-half in B.C. 344, were pop-
ular measures, evidently designed to gratify the lower orders.
The tax on the manumission of slaves (B.C. 354) would also
please them, since it would fall wholly upon the wealthy. Of
a still more popular character were the general liquidation of
debts, in B.C. 349, by means of a Commission empowered to
make advances from the treasury to all needy persons who
could offer a fair security ; and the suspension of the property-
tax, and spread of the debts over the space of three years,
which were among the measures of relief adopted in B.C. 344.
The practical opening to the Plebeians without a struggle of
the civil offices parallel with the Consulate — the Dictatorship
and the Mastership of the Knights (B.C. 353) — may also be
regarded as among the politic concessions of this period, made
for the sake of keeping the Plebeians in good humor, and pre-
venting an outbreak.

But, though these boons and blandishments effected some-
thing, it was felt nevertheless that the state of affairs was unset-
tled, and that, on the occurrence of any convenient opportunity,
there would probably be a rising. Accordingly the govern-
ment determined, so far as in it lay, to avoid furnishing an
opportunity ; and hence, for almost the first time in the history
of the Roman State, we find a policy of peace adopted and
steadily maintained for a series of years. Between the years
B.C. 355 and 347, treaties of peace were concluded with all the
important powers of Central Italy ; and Rome left herself no
enemy against whom she could legfitimately commence a war
excepting the shattered remnants of the Oscan nations and
perhaps the Sabines of the tract beyond the Anio.

At length, in B.C. 340, twelve years after the Licinio-Sex-
tian constitution had been set aside, an occasion offered which

3i6 RAWLINSON

tempted the government to depart from its peace policy, and
to run the risk of internal trouble which was well known to
be implied in the commencement of a great and important war.
The temptation, one which it was impossible to resist, was the
offer of the Campanians to become Roman subject-allies, if
Rome would protect them against the Samnites. To accept
this oflfer was to more than double the Roman territory; to
reject it was greatly to strengthen the Samnites, already the
chief power of the south of Italy. The government, which
though Patrician, was still Roman, was too patriotic to hesi-
tate. Campania was therefore received into alliance, and the
First Samnite War was the immediate consequence.

The military operations of the war will be described in the
next portion of this book (Third Period) ; but its eflfect on the
civil history is too closely connected with the period of which
we are now treating to admit of separation from it. The Ro-
man army, having carried on a successful campaign, wintered
in Campania; and the soldier-citizens, having thus had an
opportunity of consulting together, determined to mutiny.
Some were for a " secession " to Capua, but the majority were
for enforcing their will upon the usurping government at
Rome. In vain the consuls, perceiving what was afloat, tried
to disperse the army little by little before an outbreak should
come. Their intention was perceived, and the mutiny took
place at once. The army marched upon Rome and made its
demands — the government met it with a hasty levy, but these
troops refused to fight. Long negotiations followed. At
length, a tribune of the Plebs, a Genucius, proposed and carried
through a series of laws, which were accepted on both sides
as terms of reconciliation. The Licinian constitution was prac-
tically re-established ; but it was enacted, as a just penalty on
the Patricians for their repeated usurpation of both consul-
ships, that, though both consuls might never legally be Patri-
cians, it should be allowable for both of them to be Plebeians.
To prevent any future seduction of a Plebeian party by the
temptation of accumulated offices, it was enacted that no Ple-
beian should henceforth hold the same office twice within ten
years, or two offices in the same year. To alleviate the remain-
ing pressure of debt, there was an absolute abolition of all out-

ANCIENT HISTORY

317

standing claims, and a law was passed making the lending o!
money upon interest illegal. Some military grievances were
at the same time redressed, provision being made that no soldier
should be dismissed the service without cause shown, and that
no petty officer should be degraded to the ranks. On these
conditions peace was re-established ; and domestic tranquillity
being attained, Rome was once more ready to devote her whole
strength to the forwarding of her interests abroad.

THIRD PERIOD.

History of Rome from the breaking out of the First Samnite
War, B.C. 340, to the Commencement of the Wars with
Carthage, B.C. 264.*

The Third Period of Roman History is that of the great wars
in Italy, whereby Rome succeeded in making herself mistress
of the entire Peninsula proper. It comprises the four Samnite
Wars, the great Latin War, the war with Pyrrhus, a war with
the Gauls, and several minor wars terminating in the conquest
of the other lesser Italian nations. The external history of the
period is thus of the highest interest ; while the internal his-
tory is, comparatively speaking, scanty and unimportant.

When Rome determined to accept the Campanians as sub-
ject-allies, she broke her treaty with Samnium, and practically
made a declaration of war. Campania was a Samnite depen-
dency which had revolted, and which the Samnites were bent
on subjugating. The interposition of Rome in the quarrel re-

* Sources. Authors. — Livy and Diodorus are the chief authorities
for the earlier portion of this period; but the latter writer fails us after
B.C. 302. The fragments of Appian's " Samnitica " are of some value.
For the war with Pyrrhus, Plutarch's " Life " of that hero is the main
source; but his narrative must be supplemented from the fragments
of Dio Cassius, Dionysius, and Appian, and from the continuous nar-
ratives of Justin, Orosius, and Zonaras. For the period following the
departure of Pyrrhus from Italy (B.C. 275 to 264) these latter writers
are almost our sole authorities. We may consult, however, with ad-
vantage the " Epitomes " of Livy and the brief abstract of Floras.
Inscriptions. — The Fasii Capitolini are full and tolerably continu-
ous for the greater portion of this period.

3i8 RAWLINSON

sembled that of Athens in the contest between Corinth and
Corey ra. Morally, it could not be justified; but, as a matter
of policy, it could not be impugned. Rome already saw that
her most formidable Italian rival was Samnium, and that it
was with Samnium she would have to contend for the first*
place in Italy. A step which at once strengthened herself and
weakened her antagonist could not but be expedient; and
we can not be surprised that, despite its injustice, the step was
taken.

Rome, about to engage in a war for supremacy with Latium,
strengthened herself by an alliance with the knot of Sabine
communities known as " the Marsian League." Latium ob-
tained the adhesion of the Campanians, Sidicinians, and Vol-
scians. Samnium was an active ally to neither party, but took
the opportunity, which the contest offered, to advance her
frontier on the side of the Volscian territory. The struggle
between the two main belligerents was begun and concluded
within the space of three years, and, indeed, was virtually de-
cided by the events of the first campaign. The battles of Vesu-
vius and Trifanum (B.C. 337) were stoutly contested by the
Latins, but nevertheless were very decided Roman victories.
Their effect was to break up the confederacy. Many states
at once submitted. Others continued a desultory and inef-
fectual resistance; but by the end of B.C. 335 the last Latin
town had made its submission ; and Rome, having effected the
conquest, proceeded to the work of pacification.

The conclusion of the great struggle with Latium is followed
by a pause of twelve years, during which Rome undertook
nothing but trivial and unimportant wars, and those chiefly
wars which were forced upon her. Her action was paralyzed
by two causes, one internal, the other external. Her internal
danger was from the subjected Latins, who were known to be
discontented with their treatment, and might be expected to
revolt the moment Rome should enter upon any important
contest. The external cause of alarm was the invasion of Alex-
ander of Epirus, uncle of Alexander the Great, who landed in
Italy, B.C. 331, at the invitation of the Tarentines. Alexan-
der's quarrel was mainly with the Samnites and their depen-
dent allies; but, if he had been successful against them, he

ANCIENT HISTORY 319

would probably have attempted the conquest of Italy. Rome,
doubtful of the result, protected herself by a treaty with the
invader, and then nursed her strength and prepared herself to
resist him if he should attack her.

The reverses which befell Alexander of Epirus, about B.C.
325, encouraged the Romans to resume their old policy of
aggression, and to take steps which led naturally and almost
necessarily to the renewal of the struggle with Samnium. By
founding the colony of Fregellae on land conquered by the
Samnites from the Volscians, a challenge was flung down to
Samnium, which she could scarcely refuse to take up. This
was followed by an attack on Palaeopolis, an independent Greek
city, which had long been under Samnite protection. War
ensued as a matter of course. The time had, in fact, come
when Rome was prepared to contest, with the power which
she recognized as her great rival, the mastery of Southern Italy.
Mistress of Latium and Campania, and secured by treaties from
any early Etruscan attack, she felt herself equal to a vast effort ;
and she therefore determined to seize the occasion for a war
which should decide whether the hegemony of the peninsula,
or at any rate of its southern portion, should belong to herself
or to the Samnites.

The Second Samnite War — the duel between the two chief
races of Italy — covered a space of twenty-one years, from B.C.
323 to 303, inclusive. It divides itself naturally into three por-
tions. During the first, from B.C. 323 to 319, the war lan-
guished, neither party apparently putting forth its full strength.
During the second, from B.C. 319 to 312, the issue was really
determined by the three great battles, of the Caudine Forks, of
Lautulae, and of Cinna. The third period, from B.C. 312 to
303, was again one of languid hostilities, the war being un-
duly spun out, partly by the stubborn resistance of the beaten
party, partly through the desultory attacks which were made
upon Rome during these years by various enemies.

The Second Samnite War brought the disaffection of the
Latins very rapidly to a head. In B.C. 322, the second year
of the war, there was beyond a doubt a great Latin revolt.
Tusculum, Velitrae, and Privemum, three of the cities which
had experienced the harshest treatment, took the lead. A

320

RAWLINSON

night attack seems to have been made on Rome, and great
alarm caused. The Roman government, however, met the
danger with its usual wisdom. While some recommended
measures of extreme violence, the Senate adopted a policy of
conciliation. Terms were made with the rebels, some of whom
were given, others promised, full citizenship. The discon-
tented part of Latium was, in fact, incorporated into Rome.
To mark the completeness and reality of the union, L. Fulvius,
the leader of the revolt, became consul for the year, B.C. 321.
Henceforth Latium was satisfied with its position, and con-
tinued faithful through all the later troubles and rebellions.

An interval of five years only — B.C. 303 to 298 — separates
the Second from the Third Samnite War. Rome utilized it
by completely reducing the remnant of the yEquian people, by
bringing the four nations forming the Marsian League into
the position of her subject-allies,, by making alliances with the
Frentani and Picentini, and by seizing and occupying the
strong position of Nequinum (Narnia) in Umbria. She also
during this period sent aid to the Lucanians, who were at-
tacked by Cleonymus of Sparta. Samnium probably nego-
tiated, during the pause, with the Etruscans, Umbrians, and
Gauls, taking steps towards the formation of that " League
of Italy " which she brought to bear against Rome in the ensu-
ing war.

The Third Samnite War is the contest of confederated Italy
against the terrible enemy whose greatness was now seen to
threaten every power in the peninsula. Its turning-point,
which well deserves its place among the ten or twelve " De-
cisive Battles of the World," was the battle of Sentinum. After
two years of comparatively petty warfare, Samnium, in B.C.
296, brought the projected alliance to bear. Gellius Egnatius
marched, with the flower of the Samnite force, across Central
Italy into Etruria. The Gauls and Umbrians joined ; and in
B.C. 295, the confederate army of the four nations advanced up-
on Rome, which appeared to be on the brink of destruction. But
a bold step taken by the Romans saved them. Instead of stand-
ing merely on the defensive, they met the invaders with one
army under the consuls Fabius and Decius, while they marched
another into the heart of Etruria. On hearing this, the selfish

ANCIENT HISTORY 321

Etruscans, deserting their confederates, drew off to protect
their own country. The Samnites and Gauls retired across the
Apennines to Sentinum, losing the Umbrians on the way, who
remained to protect their own towns. Rome followed the re-
treating force, and after a desperate struggle defeated it, thus
really deciding the war. The confederation was broken up.
The Gauls took no further part in the contest. Rome carried
it on separately with Etruria on the one side and Samnium
on the other, till the exhaustion of both powers compelled them
to make peace. Samnium was forced to submit uncondition-
ally, was mulcted in a portion of its territory, and became a
subject-ally of Rome.

Ten years intervened between the close of the Third Samnite
War and the commencement of the next great struggle in
which Rome was engaged. Much obscurity rests upon this
interval, in which we lose the guidance of Livy without obtain-
ing that of Plutarch. It appears, however, that shortly after
the close of the Third Samnite War troubles broke out afresh
in Southern Italy in consequence of a war between the Luca-
nians and the Greeks of Thurii, B.C. 288. Rome interfered
to protect Thurii, whereupon the Lucanians eflfected a union
against Rome of the Gauls (Senones), Etruscans, Umbrians,
Samnites, Lucanians, Bruttians, and Tarentines, which, in the
year B.C. 283, menaced the Republic with destruction. But,
though brought into serious danger, Rome triumphed over
her difficulties. Fabricius defeated the combined Lucanians
and Bruttians, relieved Thurii, and received the submission
of almost all the Greek towns of the neighborhood except Ta-
rentum. Dolabella avenged on the Senonian Gauls the defeat
of Metellus at Arretium, by seizing their country and driving
them beyond its borders. The Etruscans, and their allies, the
Boii (Gauls), were defeated with great slaughter at Lake Vadi-
mon. Tarentum alone remained unpunished. It was prob-
ably to inflict damage on this covert enemy, with whom as yet
there had been no actual contest, that a Roman fleet was sent
in B.C. 282, contrary to the terms of an existing treaty, to
cruise round the heel of Italy. This fleet having been attacked
and sunk by the Tarentines, who also took possession of Thu-
rii, Rome in B.C. 281 declared war against Tarentum, which,

322

RAWLINSON

accustomed to lean on Greece for support, invited over the
Epirote prince Pyrrhus, who had already made himself a name
by his victory over Demetrius PoUorcetes, and his first brief
reign over Macedonia.

The war with Pyrrhus lasted six years, from B.C. 280 to 274.
It was the first trial of strength between Macedonized Greece
and Rome. Pyrrhus brought with him into Italy an army of
22,500 foot and 3000 horse, disciplined in the Macedonian fash-
ion, and also 20 elephants. At the outset he obtained no troops
from any Italians but the Tarentines, whose services were al-
most worthless. Nevertheless, in his first battle on the Siris,
though with an army inferior in number, he completely de-
feated the Romans, chiefly by the help of his elephants, which
disconcerted the Roman cavalry. All Lower Italy then joined
him; and, in the remainder of the contest, he had the assis-
tance of the Italian Greeks generally, of the Lucanians, the
Bruttians, and, above all, the Samnites. But neither after his
first victory, near Heracleia, nor after his second, at Ausculum
(Ascoli), was he able to efifect any thing. The battles which
he gained were stoutly contested, and cost him, each of them,
several thousands of men, whom he could not replace and could
ill spare. His power necessarily waned as time went on. His
allies, except the Samnites, were of little value. His Greek
troops harmonized ill with the Italians. Above all, while he
fought for glory, the Romans fought for their existence ; and
their patriotism and patient courage proved more than a match
for the gallantry and brilliant strategy of their opponent. It
was as much from disgust at his ill success, so far as the general
ends of the war were concerned, as from the attraction of a
tempting ofifer, that Pyrrhus, in B.C. 278, quitted Italy for
Sicily, accepted the Protectorate of the Greeks, and engaged
in a war with the Carthaginians which threw them on the Ro-
man side. Successful in this quarter to a certain extent, but,
with his usual restlessness, leaving his conquest uncompleted,
the Epirote prince returned to Italy with difficulty ; and, hav-
ing lost Sicily almost at the moment of his departure, engaged
the Romans in a third battle near Beneventum, and being there
completely defeated, gave up the war, and returned with the
almost entire loss of his army, but with heightened reputation,
to his native country.

ANCIENT HISTORY 323

The departure of Pyrrhus was followed rapidly by the com-
plete subjugation of Southern Italy. Tarentum surrendered
B.C. 2^2. Lucania and Bruttium submitted in the same year.
Rhegium was stormed, B.C. 270. In Samnium a guerrilla war-
fare was maintained till B.C. 269, when resistance finally ceased.
The Sallentines and Messapians were conquered in B.C. 266.
At the same time Rome extended and consolidated her power
in the North. A quarrel was picked with Picenum in B.C. 268.
War and subjection followed; and, to prevent future resist-
ance, half the nation was torn from its native land and trans-
planted to the opposite coast, where it received settlements
on the Gulf of Salernum. In B.C. 266, Umbria was forced to
make its submission ; and in the year following, Volsinii, the
chief of the Etruscan towns, was besieged, taken, and razed to
the ground. At the close of the year B.C. 265, Rome reigned
supreme over the length and breadth of Italy, from the Macra
to Tarentum and Rhegfium.

The chief means by which Rome established and secured her
power was her system of colonies, with its supplement, her
military roads. The foundation of colonies began, if we may
believe the Roman historians, under the kings. At any rate,
it is certain that early in the struggle between the combined
Romans, Latins, and Hernici on the one hand and the Oscan
nations on the other, the plan of establishing colonies, as gar-
risons, in towns taken from the enemy, was very widely
adopted. Such colonies were made up, in equal or nearly equal
proportions, of citizens of the three nations, who together
formed the burgher or Patrician body in the city where they
took up their abode, the previous inhabitants counting only
as a " Plebs." The system, thus employed by Rome in con-
junction with her allies, was afterwards made use of copiously
in the conquests which she effected for her own sole advantage.
As Terminus advanced, either colonies of Roman citizens {colo-
nice civiutn Romanorum), who retained all their civic rights, or
"^ Latin colonies " (colonice Latinoc), consisting of Romans who
by becoming colonists lost their rights of voting in the Roman
" comitia " and of aspiring to honors {jus sttffragii ct honorum),
but retained the rest of their citizenship, were planted far and
wide over Italy. These colonists, being Romans, having many

324

RAWLINSON

Roman rights, and being planted in an invidious position
among aliens, naturally clung to the mother-city, and were
the great bulwarks of Roman power throughout the peninsula.

Closely connected with the Roman colonial system was that
of the military roads. The genius of Appius Claudius Caecus
first conceived the idea of connecting Rome with her newly-
annexed dependency, Campania, by a solid paved road of ex-
cellent construction (B.C. 310 to 306). This road, which issued
from the Porta Capena (Gate of Capua), passed through Aricia,
Velitrae, Setia, Tarracina, Minturnae, Sinuessa, and Casilinum
to Capua ; whence it was carried, probably as early as B.C. 291,
to Venusia, and later to Brundusium. Much of the work still
remains, and attracts the admiration of travellers.

The mode in which Rome, having attained her supremacy,
administered the government of Italy, was exceedingly com-
plicated. It is impossible in a work like the present to do more
than point out the main features of the system, and distinguish,
one from another, the principal classes into which the popula-
tion of the state was divided. Broadly, we may say that the
Roman Republic bore sway in Italy over a host of minor re-
publics. Self-government was most widely spread. Every
colony was a sort of independent community, electing its own
officers and administering its own affairs. Every foreign city
under their rule was recognized by the Romans as a separate
state, and was placed on a certain definite footing with regard
to the central community. The most highly favored were the
foederatce civitates — states that had submitted to Rome upon
terms varying of course in different cases, but in all implying
the management of their own affairs, the appointment of their
own governors, and the administration of their own laws. Next
to these in advantage of position were the municipia, foreign
states which had received all the burdens together with some
or all of the rights of Roman citizenship. Last of all came the
dcdititii, natives of communities which had surrendered them-
selves to Rome absolutely, and which had all the burdens with-
out any of the rights of citizens. Roman law was administered
in these communities by a governor (prcofectus) appointed by
Rome.

Rome reserved to herself three principal rights, whereby

ANCIENT HISTORY 325

she regarded her sovereignty as sufficiently guarded. She
alone might make peace or declare war; she alone might
receive embassies from foreign powers; and she alone
might coin money. She had also undoubtedly the right of
requiring from her subject-allies such contingents of troops
as she needed in any war; which involved a further right of
indirect taxation, since the contingents were armed and paid
by the community which furnished them. She did not, like
Athens, directly tax her subject-allies ; but she derived never-
theless an important revenue from them. On the conquest of
a state, Rome always claimed to succeed to the rights of the
previously existing government ; and, as each Italian state had
a public domain of some kind or other, Rome, as she pushed
her conquests, became mistress of a vast amount of real prop-
erty of various kinds, as especially mines, forests, quarries, fish-
eries, salt-works, and the like. Further, generally, when a state
submitted to her after a war, she required, beyond all these
sources of revenue, the cession of a tract of arable or pasture
land, which she added to her old " ager publicus." Thus the
domain of Rome was continually increasing; and it was (at
least in part) to collect the revenue from the domain through-
out Italy that, in B.C. 267, the four " Italian quaestors " were
appointed, " the first Roman functionaries to whom a resi-
dence and a district out of Rome were assigned by law."

The constitutional changes in Rome itself during the period
under consideration were not very numerous or important.
They consisted mainly in the carrying out to their logical result
of the Licinio-Sextian enactments — in the complete equaliza-
tion, that is, of the two Orders. By the laws of Publilius Philo,
of Ovinius, and of the Og^ilnii, the last vestiges of Patrician
ascendency were removed, and the Plebeians were placed in
all important respects on a complete equality with the Patri-
cians. Admitted practically to a full moiety of the high gov-
ernmental offices, they acquired by degrees, through the oper-
ation of the Ovinian law, an influence fully equal to that of the
Patricians in the Senate. By the tribunate, which remained
exclusively theirs, they had even an advantage over the other
Order. The strong-hold of the exclusive party, which last
yielded itself, was, naturally, that of religious privilege. But

326 RAWLINSON

when the Pontificate and the Augurship were fairly divided
between the Orders, the struggle between the " houses " and
the commons was over, and there was nothing left for the latter
to desire.

But the termination of the internal struggle which had hith-
erto occupied the commonwealth, and secured it against the
deadly evil of political stagnation, was not complete before a
new agitation manifested itself, an agitation of a far more dan-
gerous character than that which was now just coming to an
end. Hitherto the right of suffrage at Rome, at any rate in
the more important of the two popular assemblies — the tribes
{comitia tribnta) — had rested upon the double basis of free birth
and the possession of a plot of freehold land. About B.C. 312,
the class which these qualifications excluded from the fran-
chise began to exhibit symptoms of discontent. Appius Clau-
dius Caecus, one of the boldest of political innovators, perceiv-
ing these symptoms, and either regarding them as a real peril to
the State or as indicating an occasion which he might turn to
his own personal advantage, being censor in the year above
mentioned, came forward as the champion of the excluded
classes, and, after vainly attempting to introduce individuals
belonging to them into the Senate, enrolled the entire mass
both in the centuries and in the tribes. Nor was this all. In-
stead of assigning the new voters to the city tribes, within
whose local limits they for the most part dwelt, Appius spread
them through all, or a majority, of the tribes, and thus gave
them practically an absolute control over the elections. Their
power was soon seen, in the election of a freedman, Cn. Fla-
vins, to the curule sedileship, which gave him a seat in the
Senate for the remainder of his life; and in the election of
tribunes who enabled Appius to prolong his term of office ille-
gally to the close of the fourth year. This was the inaugura-
tion of a real ochlocracy, a government in which the prepon-
derating weight belonged to the lowest class of the people.
Evil consequences would no doubt have been rapidly devel-
oped, had not the work of Appius been to a great extent un-
done— the sting extracted from his measures — by the skill and
boldness of two most sagacious censors. When Q. Fabius
Maximus and P. Decius Mus, B.C. 304, removed all who were

ANCIENT HISTORY 327

without landed qualification and all the poorer freedmen from
the country tribes, and distributed them among the four city
tribes only, the revolutionary force of Ap. Claudius's proceed-
ings was annulled, and nothing remained but a very harmless,
and almost nominal enfranchisement of the lower orders.
When the " factio forensis " could command the votes of four
tribes only out of thirty-one, or ultimately of thirty-five, it was
rendered powerless in the contitia tribiUa. In the centuries it
was of course even weaker, since there wealth had a vast pre-
ponderance over mere numbers.

The pressure of poverty still continued to be felt at Rome for
many years after the Licinian, and even after the Genucian
legislation. An insurrection, proceeding to the length of a
secession, occurred in B.C. 287 in consequence of a wide-
spread distress. An abolition of debts was found to be once
more a State necessity, and was submitted to with a view to
peace and the contentation of the poorer classes. But the tide
of military success, which soon afterwards set in, put a stop
for a long term of years to this ground of complaint and dis-
turbance. The numerous and large colonies which were con-
tinually being sent out from B.C. 232 to 177, were an effectual
relief to the proletariate, and put an end for the time to any-
thing like extreme poverty among Roman citizens. At the
same time the farming of the revenue largely increased the
wealth of the more opulent classes. It is not till about B.C.
133 that we find the questions of debt and of the relief of pov-
erty once more brought into prominence and recognized as
matters which require the attention of statesmen.

FOURTH PERIOD.

From the Commencement of the First War with Carthage to
the Rise of the Civil Broils under the Gracchi, B.C. 264
to 133.*

In the Fourth Period of Roman History, as in the Third,
and even more decidedly, the interest attaches itself to the

♦ Sources. The most important of the ancient authorities for this
period is Polybius, the earliest writer in whom we see fully developed

328 RAWLINSON

external relations of the people rather than to their in-
ternal condition. The interval comprises the long struggle
with Carthage, the Gallic War and conquest of the plain of the
Po, the three Macedonian Wars, the war with Antiochus of
Syria, the conquest of Greece, the Numantine War, and the
reduction of most of the Spanish Peninsula. At the com-
mencement of the period the dominion of Rome was confined
to the mere peninsular portion of Italy ; at its close she bore
sway over the whole of Southern Europe from the shores of the
Atlantic to the straits of Constantinople, over the chief Medi-
terranean islands, and over a portion of North Africa ; while,
further, her influence was paramount throughout the East,
where Pergamus and Egypt were her dependents, and Syria
existed merely by her sufferance. In B.C. 264, she had just
reached a position entitling her to count among the " Great
Powers " of the world, as it then was ; to rank, i. e., with
Carthage, Macedonia, and Syria; in B.C. 134, she had ab-
sorbed two of these " Great Powers," and made the third a de-
pendency. She was clearly the sole " Great Power " left ; or,
if there was a second, it was the newly-formed empire beyond
the Euphrates — that of the Parthians — which rose up as Syria

the true spirit of historical criticism. If the great work of this author
had come down to us in a complete form, we should no more have
needed any other authority for the period treated in it, than we need
any work, besides that of Thucydides, for the history of the Pelopon-
nesian War, from B.C. 431 to 411. Unfortunately, the complete
books descend no lower than B.C. 216; and even the fragments fail
us from the year B.C. 146. Consequently, after B.C. 216 we have
to depend very much upon other writers, as especially Livy, whose
" Second Decade " covers the space from B.C. 218 to 166, thus taking
up the history almost exactly where the complete books of Polybius
break off. Next to Polybius and Livy may be placed Appian, whose
"Punica," "Bellum Hannibalicum," and " Iberica" belong to this period
and occasionally throw important light upon the course of events. The
epitome of Florus is not here of much value. The biographer, Plu-
tarch, on the other hand, is a considerable help, his " Lives " of Fabius
Maximus, P. .(Emilius, Marcellus, M. Cato, and Flamininus falling,
all of them, within this brief space of one hundred and thirty years.
The short " Life of Hannibal " by Corn. Nepos possesses also some
interest; and occasional aid may be derived from Diodorus, and
Zonaras.

ANCIENT HISTORY 329

declined, and which ultimately remained the only counterpoise
to the Roman state through the whole period of its greatness.

The circumstances of the struggle with Pyrrhus, and the
Southern Italians, had forced Rome to become to some extent
a maritime power. As she gradually mastered Italy, it became
necessary to protect her coasts, exposed as they were to attack
from Epirus, from Sicily, from Carthage, even from Greece, as
experience showed. Accordingly, a fleet began to be formed
as early as B.C. 338, which received constant additions, and had
by the year B.C. 267 acquired such importance that four
" quaestors of the fleet " {qucostores classki) were then appointed,
and stationed at different ports of Italy, with the special object
of guarding the coasts and keeping the marine in an efficient
condition. But this new tendency on the part of the gjeat
Italian state could not fail to provoke the jealousy of the chief
maritime power of the Western Mediterranean, Carthage,
whose policy it had always been to oppose the establishment of
any naval rival in the waters which she regarded as her own.
Thus, unfriendly feelings, arising out of a consciousness of
clashing interests, had for some time been growing up between
Carthage and Rome. Temporarily suspended during the
height of the Pyrrhic War, when a common danger for a while
drew the two states together, they burst out at its close in
greater force than ever ; and nothing was needed but a decent
pretext, in order that the two lukewarm allies should become
open and avowed enemies.

The pretext was not long wanting. The Mamertines, a
body of Campanian mercenaries who had seized Messana, be-
ing threatened with destruction by the combined Carthagin-
ians and Syracusans, applied for help to Rome, and were
readily received into her alliance. Rome invaded Sicily, and
by an act of treachery made herself mistress of the disputed
post. War with Carthage necessarily followed, a war for the
possession of Sicily, and for maritime supremacy in the Medi-
terranean. The most remarkable feature of the war was the
rapid development of the Roman naval power during its course
— a development which is without a parallel in the history of the
world. With few and insignificant exceptions, the Romans
were landsmen till B.C. 262. In that year they beg^n to form a

330

RAWLINSON

powerful fleet. Only two years later, B.C. 260, they com-
pletely defeated, under Duilius, the whole naval force of the
Carthaginians ; and the supremacy thus acquired they succeed-
ed in maintaining by the later victories of Regulus and Luta-
tius. Their victories by sea emboldened them to send an army
across to Africa, and to attack their enemy in his own country.
Success at first attended the efforts of Regulus ; but after a lit-
tle while he was involved in difficulties, and his entire army was
either slain or captured. But notwithstanding this and numer-
ous other disasters, the indomitable spirit of the Romans pre-
vailed. After twenty-three years of perpetual warfare,
Carthage felt herself exhausted, and sued for peace. The
terms which she obtained required her to evacuate Sicily and
the adjacent islands, to pay to Rome a war contribution of 2200
talents, to acknoAvledge the independence of Hiero, king of
Syracuse, and bind herself not to make war on him or his allies.

The great importance of this war was, that it forced Rome to
become a first-rate naval power. Though the Romans did not
during its course obtain the complete mastery of the sea, they
showed themselves fully a match for the Carthaginians on the
element of which they had scarcely any previous experience.
Their land force being much superior to that of Carthage, and
their resources not greatly inferior, it became tolerably ap-
parent that success would ultimately rest with them. Their
chief deficiency was in generalship, wherein their commanders
were decidedly surpassed, not only by the Carthaginian patriot
Hamilcar, but even the mercenary Xanthippus, Here the Ro-
man system was principally to blame, whereby the command-
ers were changed annually, and the same person was expected
to be able to command equally well both by land and by sea.
Carthage continued her commanders in office, and had sep-
arate ones for the land and the sea service. Even Carthage,
however, was unwise enough to deprive herself of the services
of many an experienced captain by the barbarous practice of
putting to death any general or admiral who experienced a re-
verse.

An interval of twenty-three years separated the First from
the Second Punic War. It was employed by both sides in en-
ergetic efforts to consolidate and extend their power. Rome,

ANCIENT HISTORY 331

in B.C. 238, taking advantage of the position in which Carthage
was placed by the revoh of her mercenaries, made herself mis-
tress of the island of Sardinia, and when, upon the submission
of the mercenaries, Carthage required its restoration, played
the part of the wolf in the fable, declared herself injured by her
victim, and threatened a renewal of the war. Exhausted
Carthage had to purchase her forbearance by the cession of the
island, and the payment of a fine amounting to 1200 talents,
B.C. 237. Rome then proceeded to annex Corsica ; and soon
afterwards (B.C. 227) she laid the foundation of her provincial
system by the establishment of her first " Proconsuls," one to
administer her possessions in Sicily, the other to govern Sar-
dinia and Corsica.

About the same time that she seized Sardinia, Rome was en-
gaged in a war with the Boii (Gauls) and Ligures in North
Italy, in which the Boii are said to have been the aggressors.
Unsuccessful in their attempts during the campaigns of B.C.
238 and 237, these barbarians, in B.C. 236, invited the aid of
their kindred tribes from beyond the Alps ; but the allies after
a little while fell out, and the Boii and Ligures were glad to buy
peace of Rome by the cession of some of their lands.

Rome, soon afterwards, showed herself for the first time on
the eastern coast of the Adriatic, and took part in the affairs of
Greece. The decay of Grecian power had allowed the piratical
dispositions of the Illyrians to have free course ; and the com-
merce of the Adriatic, the coasts of Epirus and Corcyra, and
perhaps even that of Italy to some extent, suffered from the
constant attacks of Illyrian cruisers. Entreated to protect
them by the unhappy Greek cities, the Romans, in B.C. 230,
sent an embassy to Scodra, to require the cessation of the
piracies. Their ambassadors were murdered ; and a war neces-
sarily followed. Rome, in B.C. 229, with a fleet of 200 ships,
cleared the Adriatic, made the Illyrians of Scodra tributary,
established Demetrius of Pharos as dependent dynast over the
coasts and islands of Dalmatia, and accepted the protectorate
of the Greeks of Apollonia, Epidamnus, and Corcyra. In re-
turn the Greeks acknowledged the Romans as their kin, and
admitted them to participation in the Isthmian games and the
Eleusinian mysteries. Thus Rome obtained a hold upon the

332

RAWLINSON

opposite side of the Adriatic, and a right of interference in the
affairs of Greece.

A still more important war soon followed. Rome, before
engaging in any further enterprises beyond the limits of Italy,
was anxious to extend her dominion to its natural boundary
upon the north, the great chain of the Alps which shuts off
Italy from the rest of Europe. With this view, she proceeded,
about B.C. 232, to make large assignments of land, and plant
new and important colonies, in the territory of the Senones,
thus augmenting her strength towards the north and prepar-
ing for a great contest with the Gauls. These last, finding
themselves threatened, at once flew to arms. Obtaining aid
from their kindred tribes in and beyond the Alps, they crossed
the Apennines in B.C. 225, and spread themselves far and wide
over Etruria, advancing as far as Clusium, and threatening
Rome as in the days of Brennus. Three armies took the field
against them, and though one, composed of Etruscans, was
completely defeated, the two others, combining their attack,
gained a great victory over the invaders near Telamon, and
forced them to evacuate Etruria. Rome then carried the war
into the plain of the Po. Having allied herself with the Veneti,
and even with the Gallic tribe adjoining them, the Cenomani,
she was able in a little time to reduce the whole tract to sub-
jection. The Boii and Lingones submitted in B.C. 224 ; the
Anari in B.C. 223 ; the Insubres were conquered after a fierce
struggle, which occupied the years B.C. 223 and 222. Medio-
lanum and Comum, the last towns which held out, submitted
in the last-named year, and Roman dominion was at length
extended to the great barrier of the Alps.

These conquests were scarcely effected when fresh troubles
broke out in Illyria. Demetrius of Pharos, dissatisfied with
the position accorded him by the Romans, declared himself
independent, attacked the Roman allies, and encouraged the
Illyrians to resume the practice of piracy. Allied with An-
tigonus Doson, he thought himself strong enough to defy the
Roman power. But Antigonus dying, B.C. 220, and Philip,
his successor, being a mere boy, a Roman army, in B.C. 219,
chastised Demetrius, destroyed his capital, and drove him from
his kingdom.

ANCIENT HISTORY

333

It was ill-judged in Rome to allow this petty quarrel to draw
her attention to the East, when in the West an enemy had
arisen, against whom her utmost efforts were now needed.
From the moment that Carthage was not only robbed of Sar-
dinia, but forced to pay a fine for having ventured to remon-
strate against the wrong done her, the determination to resume
the struggle with Rome at the first convenient opportunity be-
came a fixed national sentiment. There was indeed a peace
party in the Punic community ; but it had little weight or force.
The advocates of war, who had found their fitting leaders in
the warriors of the Barcine family — Hamilcar, his sons, and
son-in-law — were all-powerful in the government; and under
them it became and remained the one sole object of Carthage
to bring herself into a position in which she could hope to re-
new her contest with her hated antagonist on such terms as
might promise her a fair prospect of success. No sooner was
the revolt of the mercenaries put down (B.C. 237) by the judi-
cious efforts of Hamilcar Barca, than the project was formed
of obtaining in Spain a compensation, and more than a com-
pensation, for all that had been lost in Sicily, Sardinia, and the
lesser islands. Hamilcar, in the last nine years of his life, B.C.
236 to 228, established the Carthaginian power over the whole
of Southern and South-eastern Spain, the fairest portion of the
peninsula. His work was carried on and completed in the
course of the next eight years, B.C. 227 to 220, by his son-in-
law, Hasdrubal. Andalusia, Murcia, and Valencia were occu-
pied. A warlike population, Iberic and Celtic, was reduced
and trained to arms under Carthaginian officers. Towns were
built ; trade prospered ; agriculture flourished. Above all, the
rich silver-mines near Carthagena (Carthago Nova) were dis-
covered and skilfully worked ; Spain more than paid her ex-
penses ; and the home-treasury was amply provided with those
" sinews of war " without which a sustained military effort is
impossible.

The indifference with which Rome saw this extension of the
Carthaginian power is very surprising. She did indeed make
alliance with the semi-Greek communities of Saguntum
(Zacynthus) and Emporiae about B.C. 226, and at the same time
obtained a promise from Hasdrubal that he would not push his

334

RAWLINSON

conquests beyond the Ebro ; but otherwise she appeared un-
observant or careless of her rival's acquisitions. Probably she
thought that the designs of Carthage were in the main com-
mercial, and regarded an invasion of Italy from the side of
Spain as simply an impossibility. Perhaps she thought her
enemy's strength so much reduced, and her own so much in-
creased, as to render it inconceivable that the struggle should
ever be renewed, unless she chose at her own time to force a
contest. As she remained mistress of the sea, and Carthage
did not even make any effort to dispute her maritime su-
premacy, it seemed difficult for her rival to attack her in any
quarter, while it was easy for her to carry the war into any por-
tion of the Carthaginian territory.

But Hannibal, sworn from his boyhood to eternal hatred of
Rome, had determined, as soon as he succeeded to the com-
mand (B.C. 220), on the mode and route by which he would
seek to give vent to his enmity, to save his own nation and at
the same time destroy her foe. Fully appreciating the weak-
ness of Carthage for defence, it was his scheme to carry the war
without a moment's unnecessary delay into the enemy's coun-
try, to give the Romans ample employment there, and see if
he could not exhaust their resources and shatter their con-
federacy. The land route from Spain to Italy had for him no
terrors. He could count on the good dispositions of most of
the Celtic tribes, who looked on him as the destined deliverer
of Cisalpine Gaul from the iron gripe of Rome. He probably
knew but little of the dangers and difficulties of crossing the
Alps ; but he was well aware that they had been often crossed
by the Gauls, and that he would find in the Alpine valleys an
ample supply of friendly and experienced guides. Arrived in
Cisalpine Gaul, he would have the whole population with him,
and he would be able, after due consideration, to determine on
his further course. With the veteran army which he brought
from Spain, and with his own strategic ability, he trusted to
defeat any force that Rome could bring into the field against
him. For ultimate success he depended on his power of loos-
ening the ties which bound the Italic confederacy together, of
raising up enemies to Rome in Italy itself, and at the same time
of maintaining his army in such efficiency that it might be dis-

ANCIENT HISTORY 335

tinctly recogfnized as master of the open field, incapable of be-
ing resisted unless behind walls, or by defensive guerilla war-
fare. With these views and objects, Hannibal, in B.C. 219,
commenced the Second Punic War by laying siege to Sag^n-
tum.

The issue of the Second Punic War was determined by the
dauntless resolution and the internal vigor of Rome. She had
opposed to her the most consummate general of antiquity ; a
state as populous and richer in resources than her own ; a vet-
eran army ; a possible combination of various powerful allies ;
above all, an amount of disaffection among her own subjects,
the extent of which could not be estimated beforehand, but
which was at any rate sure to be considerable. Three battles
showed that Hannibal was irresistible in the field, and taught
the Romans to avoid general engagements. The third was
followed by a wide-spread defection of the Roman subject-al-
lies— all Italy from Samnium and Campania southward passed
over to the side of Hannibal. But the rest of the federation
stood firm. Not a Latin deserted to the enemy. Central Italy
from sea to sea held to Rome. She had the resources of Etru-
ria, Umbria, Picenum, Sabina, Latium, to draw upon, besides
her own. By immense efforts, including the contraction of a
large National Debt, she contrived to maintain her ground,
and gradually to reduce Hannibal to the defensive. The alli-
ances, by which Hannibal sought to better his position, with
Syracuse, B.C. 215, and with Philip of Macedon, B.C. 216, did
him scant service, Rome in each case meeting the new enemy
on his own ground, and there keeping him fully employed.
The hopes of a successful issue to Carthage then rested upon
the junction of the second army of Spain, under Hasdrubal,
with the reduced force of Hannibal in Italy, a junction frus-
trated by the battle of the Metaurus, which was thus the turn-
ing-point of the war. After this reverse, the transfer of the war
into Africa was a matter of course ; and this transfer rendered
necessary the recall of Hannibal from Italy and the relinquish-
ment of all the great hopes which his glorious enterprise had
excited. There remained just a possibility that in a last
pitched battle on his native soil, Hannibal's genius might re-
establish the superiority of the Carthaginian arms. But the

336 RAWLINSON

battle of Zama removed this final chance. Hannibal met in
Scipio Africanus a general, not indeed his equal, but far su-
perior to any of those with whom he had been previously en-
gaged ; and, his troops being mostly of inferior quality, he suf-
fered, through no fault of his own, the great defeat which
rendered further resistance impossible. Carthage, after Zama,
became a dependent Roman ally.

The gains of Rome by the Second Punic War were, in the
first place, the complete removal of Carthage from the position
of a counterpoise and rival to that of a small dependent com-
munity, powerless for good or evil; secondly, the addition
to the Roman land dominion of the greater part of Spain, which
was formed into two provinces, Citerior and Ulterior ; thirdly,
the absorption of the previously independent state of Syracuse
into the Roman province of Sicily ; fourthly, the setting up of
a Roman protectorate over the native African tribes ; and fifth-
ly, the full and complete establishment of Roman maritime
supremacy over the whole of the Western Mediterranean. The
war further tended to the greater consolidation of the Roman
power in Italy. It crushed the last reasonable hopes of the
Ligurians and Gauls in the north. It riveted their fetters more
firmly than ever on the non-Latin races of the centre and the
south, the Umbrians, Etruscans, Sabines, Picentians, Apulians,
Bruttians. Throughout Italy large tracts of land were confis-
cated by the sovereign state; and fresh colonies of Romans
and Latins were sent out. In Campania and the southern
Picenum, the whole soil was declared forfeit. The repulse of
Hannibal involved a second subjugation of Italy, more com-
plete and more harsh than the first. Everywhere, except in
Latium, the native races were depressed, and a Latin dominion
was established over the length and breadth of the land.

Another result of the Hannibalic War, which completed the
subjugation of the Western Mediterranean basin, was to hasten
the collision between the aggressive Republic and the East,
which had long been evidently impending. Already, as early
as B.C. 273, Rome had entered into friendly relations with
Ecn/pt, and even before this she had made a commercial
treaty with Rhodes. About B.C. 245, she had offered to
King Ptolemy Euergetes a contingent for his Syrian War;

ANCIENT HISTORY 337

and soon afterwards she interceded with Seleucus CalHnicus
on behalf of the Ilians, her " kindred." Her wars with the
Illyrian pirates, B.C. 229 to 219, had brought her into con-
tact with the states of Greece, more particularly with the .(Eto-
lians ; and finally, the alliance of Philip, king of Macedon, with
Hannibal, had forced her to send a fleet and army across the
Adriatic, and had closely connected her with Elis, with
Sparta, and even with the Asiatic kingdom of Pergamus.
Circumstances had thus drawn her on, without any distinctly
ambitious designs on her part, to an interference in the
affairs of the East — an interference which, in the existing con-
dition of the Oriental world, could not but have the most mo-
mentous consequences. For throughout the East, since the
time of Alexander, all things had tended to corruption and de-
cay. In Greece, the spirit of patriotism, feebly kept alive in the
hearts of a select few, such as Aratus and PhilopcEmen, was
on the point of expiring. Intestine division made the very
name of Hellas a mockery, and pointed her out as a ready prey
to any invader. In Macedonia luxury had made vast strides ;
military discipline and training had been neglected ; loyalty
had altogether ceased to exist ; little remained but the inheri-
tance of a great name and of a system of tactics which was of
small value, except under the animating influen'-e of a good
general. The condition of the other Alexandrine monarchies
was even worse. In Syria and in Egypt, while the barbarian
element had been raised but slightly above its natural level
by Hellenic influence, the Hellenic had suffered greatly by its
contact with lower types of humanity. The royal races, Se-
leucids and Ptolemies, were effete and degenerate ; the armed
force that they could bring into the field might be numerous,
but it was contemptible ; and a general of even moderate abil-
ities was a rarity. It was only among the purely Asiatic mon-
archies of the more remote East that any rival, really capable
of coping with Rome, was now likely to show itself. The
Macedonian system had lived out its day, and was ready to give
place to the young, vigorous, and boldly aggressive power
which had arisen in the West.

The conclusion of peace with Carthage was followed rapidly
by an attack on Macedonia, for which the conduct of Philip

338 RAWLINSON

had furnished only too many pretexts. Philip had probably
lent aid to Carthage in her final struggle: he had certainly
without any provocation commenced an aggressive war against
Rome's ancient ally, Egypt, and he had plunged also into
hostilities with Attains and the Rhodians, both of whom were
among the friends of Rome, the former being protected by a
treaty. Rome was bound in honor to aid her allies; and no
blame can attach to her for commencing the Second Mace-
donian War in B.C. 200, and despatching her troops across
the Adriatic. Her conduct of the war was at first altogether
mediocre; but from the time that T. Quinctius Flamininus
took the command (B.C. 198) it was simply admirable, and
deserved the success which attended it. The proclamation of
general liberty to the Grecian states, while it could not fail of
being popular, and was thus excellently adapted to deprive
Philip of his Hellenic allies, and to rally to the Roman cause
the whole power of Hellas, involved no danger to Roman in-
terests, which were perfectly safe under a system that estab-
lished universal disunion. The gift of liberty to the Greeks by
Rome in B.C. 198, is parallel to the similar gift of universal
autonomy to the same people by Sparta and Persia in B.C. 387
at the " Peace of Antalcidas." On both occasions, the idda
under which the freedom was conceded was that expressed by
the maxim " Divide et impera." The idea was not indeed now
carried out to an extreme length. There was no dissolution
of the leagues of Achsea, ^tolia, or Boeotia. These leagues
were in fact too small to be formidable to such a power as
Rome. And as they had embraced the Roman side during
the continuance of the war, their dissolution could scarcely
be insisted on. Thessaly however was, even at this time, in
pursuance of the policy of separation, split up into four govern-
ments.

The battle of Cynoscephalae, by which the Second Macedo-
nian War was terminated, deserves a place among the " Deci-
sive Battles of the World." The relative strength of the " le-
gion " and the " phalanx " was then for the first time tried
upon a grand scale ; and the superiority of the " legion " was
asserted. No doubt, man for man, the Roman soldiers were
better than the Macedonian ; but it was not this superiority

ANCIENT HISTORY 339

which gained the day. The phalanx, as an organization, was
clumsy and unwieldy; the legion was light, elastic, adapted
to every variety of circumstances. The strength and weakness
of the phalanx were never better shown than at Cynoscephalae ;
and its weakness — its inability to form quickly, to maintain its
order on uneven ground, or to change front — lost the battle.
The loss was complete, and irremediable. Macedonia was
vanquished, and Rome became thenceforth the arbitress of the
world.

While her arms were thus triumphant in the East, Rome
was also gaining additional strength in the West. In the very
year of the conclusion of peace with Carthage, B.C. 201, she
recommenced hostilities in the plain of the Po, where the Gauls
had ever since the invasion of Hannibal defied the Roman
authority and maintained their independence. It was neces-
sary to reconquer this important tract. Accordingly, from
B.C. 201 to 191, the Romans were engaged in a prolonged
Gallic War in this district, in which, though ultimately success-
ful, they suffered many reverses. Their garrisons at Placentia
and Cremona were completely destroyed and swept away.
More than one pitched battle was lost. It was only by ener-
getic and repeated efforts, and by skilfully fomenting the di-
visions among the tribes, that Rome once more established
her dominion over this fair and fertile region, forcing the Gauls
to become her reluctant subjects.

The conquest of Gallia Cisalpina was followed by a fresh
arrangement of the territory. The line of the Po was taken
as that which should bound the strictly Roman possessions,
and while " Gallia Transpadana " was relinquished to the na-
tive tribes, with the exception of certain strategic points, such
as Cremona and Aquileia, " Gallia Cispadana " was incorpo-
rated absolutely into Italy. The colonies of Placentia and Cre-
mona were re-established and reorganized. New foundations
were made at Bononia (Bologna), Mutina (Modena), and
Parma in the Boian country. The iCmilian Way was carried
on (B.C. 187) from Ariminum to Placentia. The Boians and
Lingones were rapidly and successfully Latinized. Beyond
the Po, the Gallic communities, though allowed to retain their
existence and their native governments, and even excused from

340

RAWLINSON

the payment of any tribute to their conquerors, were regarded
as dependent upon Rome, and were especially required to check
the incursions of the Alpine or Transalpine Celts, and to allow
no fresh immigrants to settle on the southern side of the moun-
tain-chain.

Meanwhile, in the East, the defeat of Philip, the withdrawal
of the Romans, and the restoration of the Greeks to freedom,
had been far from producing tranquillity. The yEtolian robber-
community was dissatisfied with the awards of Flamininus,
and hoped, in the scramble that might follow a new war, to gain
an increase of territory. Antiochus of Syria was encouraged
by the weakness of Macedon to extend his dominions in Asia
Minor, and even to effect a lodgment in Europe, proceedings
which Rome could scarcely look upon with indifference. War
broke out in Greece in the very year that Flamininus quitted
it, B.C. 194, by the intrigues of the .^Etolians, who were bent
on creating a disturbance. At the same time, Antiochus
showed more and more that he did not fear to provoke the
Romans, and was quite willing to measure his strength against
theirs, if occasion offered. In B.C. 195 he received Hannibal
at his court with special honors ; and soon afterwards he en-
tered into negotiations which had it for their object to unite
Macedonia, Syria, and Carthage against the common foe. In
B.C. 194 or 193 he contracted an alliance with the yEtolians ;
and finally, in B.C. 192, he proceeded with a force of 10,500
men from Asia into Greece.

This movement of Antiochus had been foreseen by the
Romans, who about the same time landed on the coast of
Epirus with a force of 25,000 men. War was thus, practically,
declared on both sides. The struggle was, directly and imme-
diately, for the protectorate of Greece; indirectly and pros-
pectively, for political ascendency. Antiochus " the Great," as
he was called, the master of all Asia from the valley of the In-
dus to the iEgean, thought himself quite competent to meet and
defeat the upstart power which had lately ventured to inter-
meddle in the affairs of the " Successors of Alexander," Nar-
row-minded and ignorant, he despised his adversary, and took
the field with a force absurdly small, which he could without
difficulty have quadrupled. The natural result followed. Rome

ANCIENT HISTORY 341

easily defeated him in a pitched battle, drove him across the
sea, and following him rapidly into his own country, shattered
his power, and established her own prestige in Asia, by the
great victory of Magnesia, which placed the Syrian empire at
her mercy. Most fortunate was it for Rome that the sceptre
of Syria was at this time wielded by so weak a monarch. Had
the occupant of the Seleucid throne possessed moderate ca-
pacity ; had he made a proper use of his opportunities ; had
he g^ven the genius of Hannibal, which was placed at his dis-
posal, full scope ; had he, by a frank and generous policy, at-
tached Philip of Macedon to his side, the ambitious Republic
might have been checked in mid-career, and have suflFered a
repulse from which there would have been no recovery for
centuries.

The " moderation " of Rome after the battle of Magnesia
has been admired by many historians ; and it is certainly true
that she did not acquire by her victory a single inch of fresh
territory, nor any direct advantage beyond the enrichment of
the State treasury. But indirectly the advantages which she
gained were considerable. She was able to reward her allies,
Eumenes of Pergamus and the Rhodians, in such a way as to
make it apparent to the whole East that the Roman alliance
was highly profitable. She was able to establish, and she did
establish, on the borders of Macedonia, a great and powerful
state, a counterpoise to the only enemy which she now feared
in Europe. She was able to obtain a cheap renown by pro-
claiming once more the liberty of Greece, and insisting that
the Greek cities of Asia Minor, or at any rate those which had
lent her aid, should be recognized as free — a proclamation
which cost her nothing, and whereby she secured herself a
' body of friends on whose services she might hereafter count
in this quarter. That she was content with these gains, that
she evacuated Asia Minor, as she had previously evacuated
Greece, was probably owing to the fact that she was not as
yet prepared to occupy, and maintain her dominion over,
countries so far distant from Rome. She had found the diffi-
culty of holding even Spain as a part of her empire, and was
forced by the perpetual attacks of the unconquered and revolts
of the conquered natives to maintain there perpetually an army

342 RAWLINSOK

of 40,000 men. She had not yet made up her mind to annex
even Greece ; much less, therefore, could she think of holding
the remote Asia Minor. It was sufficient for her to have re-
pulsed a foe who had ventured to advance to her doors, to have
increased her reputation by two glorious campaigns and a
great victory, and to have paved the way for a future occupa-
tion of Western Asia, if circumstances should ever render it
politic.

In Greece, the defeat of Antiochus was followed, necessarily,
by the submission of the ^tolians, who were mulcted in large
portions of their territory and made to pay a heavy fine. Rome
annexed to her own dominions only Cephallenia and Zacyn-
thus, distributing the rest among her allies, who, however, were
very far from being satisfied. The Achaean League and Philip
were both equally displeased at the. limits that were set to their
ambition, and were ready, should opportunity offer, to turn
their arms against their recent ally.

In the West, four wars continued to occupy a good deal, of
the Roman attention. Spain was still far from subdued ; and
the Roman forces in the country were year after year engaged
against the Lusitani or the Celtiberi, with very doubtful suc-
cess, until about B.C. 181 to 178, when some decided advan-
tages were gained.. In the mountainous Liguria the freedom-
loving tribes showed the same spirit which has constantly been
exhibited by mountaineers, as by the Swiss, the Circassians,
and others. War raged in this region from B.C. 193 to 170;
and the Roman domination over portions of the Western
Apennines and the maritime Alps was only with the utmost
difficulty established by the extirpation of the native races or
their transplantation to distant regions. No attempt was made
really to subjugate the entire territory. It was viewed as a
training-school for the Roman soldiers and officers, standing
to Rome very much as Circassia long stood to Russia, and as
Algeria even now stands to France. In Sardinia and in Cor-
sica perpetual wars, resembling slave-hunts, were waged with
the native races of the interior, especially in the interval from
B.C. 181 to 173.

The discontent of Philip did not lead him to any rash or
imprudent measures. He defended his interests, so far as was

ANCIENT HISTORY 343

possible, by negotiations. When Rome insisted, he yielded.
But all the while, he was nursing the strength of Macedonia,
recruiting her finances, increasing the number of her allies,
making every possible preparation for a renewal of the strug-
gle, which had gone so much against him at Cynoscephalae.
Rome suspected him, but had not the face to declare actual
war against so recent an ally and so complaisant a subordinate.
She contented herself with narrowing his dominions, strength-
ening Eumenes against him, and sowing dissensions in his
family. Demetrius, his younger son, who lived at Rome as a
hostage, was* encouraged to raise his thoughts to the throne,
which he was given to understand Rome would gladly see him
occupy. Whether Demetrius was willing to become a " cat's-
paw " is not apparent ; but the Roman intrigues on his behalf
certainly brought about his death, and caused the reig^ of
Philip to end in sorrow and remorse, B.C. 179.

The accession of Perseus to the Macedonian throne was
only so far a gain for Rome that he was less competent than
Philip to conduct a g^eat enterprise. In many respects the
position of Macedonia was bettered by the change of sover-
eigns. Perseus, a young and brave prince, was popular, not
only among his own* subjects, but throughout Greece, where
the national party had begun to see that independence was an
impossible dream, and that the choice really lay between sub-
jection to the wholly foreign Romans and to the semi-Hellenic
and now thoroughly Hellenized Macedonians. Perseus, again,
had no personal enemies. The kings of Syria and Egfypt, who
could not forgive his father the wrongs which they had suf-
fered at his hands, had no quarrel with the present monarch ;
to whom the former (Seleucus IV.) readily gave his daughter
in marriage. The design of Philip to re-establish Macedonia
in a position of real independence was heartily adopted by his
successor; and Rome learnt by every act of the new prince,
that she had to expect shortly an outbreak of hostilities in this
quarter.

Yet, for a while, she procrastinated. Her wars with Liguria,
Sardinia, and Corsica still gave her occupation in the West,
while a new enemy, the Istri, provoked by the establishment
of her colony of Aquileia (B.C. 183), caused her constant

344

RAWLINSON

trouble and annoyance in the border land between Italy and
Macedon, the Upper lUyrian country. But, about B.C. 172,
it became clear that further procrastination would be fatal to
her interests — would, in fact, be equivalent to the withdrawal
of all further interference with the affairs of Greece and the
East. Perseus was becoming daily bolder and more powerful.
His party among the Greeks was rapidly increasing. The
iEtolians called in his aid. The Boeotians made an alliance with
him. Byzantium and Lampsacus placed themselves under his
protection. Even the Rhodians paid him honor and observ-
ance. If the protectorate of Greece was not to slip from the
hands of Rome and to be resumed by Macedon, it was high
time that Rome should take the field and vindicate her preten-
sions by force of arms. Accordingly, in the autumn of B.C.
172, an embassy was sent to Perseus, with demands wherewith
it was impossible that he should comply ; and when the envoys
were abruptly dismissed, war was at once declared.

The victory of Pydna, gained by L. .^Emilius PauUus (June
:t2y B.C. 168), was a repetition of that at Cynoscephalae, but
had even more important consequences. Once more the le-
gion showed itself superior to the phalanx ; but now the pha-
lanx was not merely defeated but destroyed, and with it fell
the monarchy which had invented it and by its means attained
to greatness. Nor was this the whole. Not only did the king-
dom of Alexander perish at Pydna, 144 years after his death,
but the universal dominion of Rome over the civilized world
was thereby finally established. The battle of Pydna was the
last occasion upon which a civilized foe contended on some-
thing like equal terms with Rome for a separate and indepen-
dent existence. All the wars in which Rome was engaged
after this were either rebellions, aggressive wars upon barba-
rians with a view to conquest, or defensive wars against the
barbarians who from time to time assailed her. The victories
of Zama, Magnesia, and Pydna convinced all the world but
the " outer barbarians " that it was in vain to struggle against
Roman ascendency, that safety was only to be found in sub-
mission and obedience. Hence the progress of Rome from
this time was, comparatively speaking, peaceful. Her suc-
cesses had now reduced the whole civilized world to depen-

ANCIENT HISTORY 345

dence. When it was her pleasure to exchange dependence for
actual incorporation into her empire, she had simply to de-
clare her will, and was, generally, unresisted. Occasionally,
indeed, the state marked out for absorption would in sheer
despair take up arms ; e. g., Achaea, Carthage, Judaea. But
for the most part there was no struggle, merely submission.
Greece (except Achaea), Macedonia, Asia Minor, Syria, Egypt,
were annexed peaceably; and the only remaining gjeat war
of the Republic was with the barbarian, Mithridates of Pontus.

But Rome, though her military successes had elevated her
to this commanding position, was still loath to undertake the
actual government of the countries over which she had estab-
lished her ascendency. Her experiment in Spain was not en-
couraging ; and she would willingly have obtained the advan-
tages of a widely-extended sway, without its drawbacks of
enlarged responsibilities and ever-recurring difficulties and
entanglements. Accordingly, her policy was still to leave the
conquered regions to rule themselves, but at the same time so
to weaken them by separation, that they might never more be
formidable, and so to watch over and direct their proceedings
that these might in no way clash with the notions which she
entertained of her own interests. Moreover, as she saw no
reason why she should not obtain permanent pecuniary advan-
tage from her victories, she determined to take from both
Illyricum and Macedonia a land-tax equal to one-half of the
amount which had been previously exacted by the native
sovereigns.

While, however, professedly leaving the countries which she
had conquered to govern themselves, Rome could not bring
herself really to let them act as they pleased. What she did
was to substitute for government a system of surveillance.
Everywhere she was continually sending commissioners (le-
gati), who not merely kept her acquainted with all that passed
in the states which they visited, but actively interfered with
the course of government, suggesting certain proceedings and
forbidding others, acting as referees in all quarrels between
state and state, giving their decisions in the name of Rome,
and threatening her vengeance on the recalcitrant.

The subjugation of the enemies of Rome was always fol-

346 RAWLINSON

lowed by a tendency on her part to quarrel with her friends.
Her friends were maintained and strengthened merely as coun-
terpoises to some foe ; and when the foe ceased to exist or to
be formidable, the friends were no longer needed. Thus the
fall of Macedonia and complete prostration of Greece produced
an immediate coolness between Rome and her chief Eastern
allies, Pergamus and Rhodes.

The vast prestige which Rome acquired by the victory of
Pydna is strikingly shown by the fact that she was able in the
same year to deprive Antiochus Epiphanes of the fruits of all
his Egyptian successes, by a mere command haughtily issued
by her commissioner, Popillius. Antiochus withdrew from
Egypt when he was on the point of conquering it ; and even
relinquished the island of Cyprus to his antagonist. Rome al-
lowed him, however, to retain possession of Coele-Syria and
Palestine.

The pacification of the East was followed by another of those
pauses which occur from time to time in the history of the
Roman Republic, after a great effort has been made and a
great success attained, when the government appears to have
been undecided as to its next step. Eighteen years intervene
between the close of the Third Macedonian and the commence-
ment of the Third Punic War — eighteen years, during which
Rome was engaged in no contest of the least importance, un-
less it were that which continued to be waged in Spain against
the Lusitanians and a few other native tribes. She did not,
indeed, ever cease to push her dominion in some quarter. In
the intervals between her great wars, she almost always prose-
cuted some petty quarrels ; and this was the case in the interval '
between B.C. i68 and 150, when she carried on hostilities with i
several insignificant peoples, as the Celtic tribes, in the Alpine '
valleys, the Ligurians of the tract bordering on Nicsea (Nice)
and Antipolis (Antibes), the Dalmatians, the Corsicans, and
others.

But the time came when the government was no longer con-
tent with these petty and trivial enterprises. After eighteen
years of irresolution, it was decided to take important matters
in hand — to remove out of the way the city which, however
reduced, was still felt to be Rome's sole rival in the Western

ANCIENT HISTORY 347

world, and to assume the actual government of a new depen-
dency in a new continent. The determination to destroy Car-
thage and to form Africa into a province, was in no way forced
upon Rome by circumstances, but was decided upon after
abundant deliberation by the predominant party in the state,
as the course best calculated to advance Roman interests. The
grounds of quarrel with Carthage were miserably insufficient ;
and the tyranny of the stronger was probably never exerted in
a grosser or more revolting form, than when Rome required
that Carthage, which had observed, and more than observed,
every obligation whereto she was bound in treaty, should nev-
ertheless, for the greater advantage of Rome, cease to exist.
It was not to be expected that the idea of a political suicide
would approve itself to the Carthaginian government. But
less than this would not content Rome, which, having first se-
cured every possible advantage from the inclination of her ad-
versary to make sacrifices for peace, revealed finally a require-
ment that could not be accepted without war.

The Third Punic War lasted four years — from B.C. 149 to
146 inclusive. It was a struggle into which Carthage entered
purely from a feeling of despair, because the terms offered to
her — the destruction of the city, and the removal of the people
to an inland situation — were such that death seemed preferable
to them. The resistance made was gallant and prolonged,
though at no time was there any reasonable hope of success.
Carthage was without ships, without allies, almost without
arms, since she had recently surrendered armor and weapons
for 200,000 men. Yet she maintained the unequal fight for
four years, exhibiting a valor and an inventiveness worthy of
her best days. At length, in B.C. 146, the Romans under
Scipio i^milianus, forced their way into the town, took it al-
most house by house, fired it in all directions, and ended by
levelling it with the ground. The Carthaginian territory was
then made into the " province " of " Africa ; " a land-tax and
poll-tax were imposed ; and the seat of government was fixed
at Utica.

During the continuance of the Carthaginian War, troubles
broke out in the Hellenic peninsula, which enabled Rome to
pursue in that quarter also the new policy of annexation and

348 RAWLINSON

absorption. A pretender, who gave out that he was the son of
Perseus, raised the standard of revoh in Macedonia, defeated
the Romans in a pitched battle, B.C. 149, and invaded Thes-
saly, but was in the following year himself defeated and made
prisoner by Metellus. The opportunity was at once taken of
reducing Macedonia into the form of a " province." At the
same time, without even any tolerable pretext, a quarrel was
picked with the Achaean League, B.C. 148, which was required
to dissolve itself. A brief war followed which was terminated
by Mummius, who plundered and destroyed Corinth, B.C. 146.
Achaea was then practically added to the empire, though she
was still allowed for some years to amuse herself with some of
the old forms of freedom, from which all vital force had de-
parted.

But while Rome was thus extending herself.in the South and
in the East, and adding new provinces to her empire, in her
old provinces of the West her authority was fiercely disputed ;
and it was with the utmost difficulty that she maintained herself
in possession. The native tribes of the Spanish Peninsula
were brave and freedom-loving ; their country was strong and
easy of defence ; and Rome found it almost impossible to sub-
jugate them. The Roman dominion had indeed never yet
been established in the more northern and western portions of
the country, which were held by the Lusitani, the Gallseci, the
Vaccaei, and the Cantabri ; and a perpetual border war was con-
sequently maintained, in which the Roman armies were fre-
quently worsted. The gallantry and high spirit of the natives
was especially shown from B.C. 149 to 140 under the leadership
of the Lusitanian, Viriathus ; and again from B.C. 143 to 133,
in the course of the desperate resistance ofifered to the Roman
arms by the Numantians. Rome was unable to overcome
either enemy without having recourse to treachery.

While the freedom-loving tribes of the West showed so
much reluctance to surrender their liberties into the hands of
Rome, in the East her dominion received a large extension by
the voluntary act of one of her allies. Attains III., king of
Pergamus, who held under his sovereignty the greater part of
Asia Minor, was found at his death (B.C. 133) to have left his
Kingdom by will to the Roman people. This strange legacy

ANCIENT HISTORY 349

was, as was natural, disputed by the expectant heir, Aristonicus,
bastard son of Attalus, and was afterwards denied by Mithrida-
tes V. ; but there is no real ground for calling it in question*
Rome had no doubt intrigued to obtain the cession, and con-
sequently she did not hesitate to accept it. A short war with
Aristonicus (B.C. 133 to 130) gave the Romans full possession
of the territory, the greater portion of which was formed into
a province; Phrygia Major being, however, detached, and
ceded to Mithridates IV., king of Pontus, who had assisted
Rome in the brief struggle.

The internal changes in the Roman government during the
period here under consideration were gentle, gradual, and for
the most part informal ; but they amounted in course of time to
a sensible and far from unimportant modification. The long
struggle between the Patrician and Plebeian Orders was termi-
nated by the Genucian revolution ; and, the chief Plebeian fam-
ilies being now placed on a par with the Patricians, a united
nobility stood at the head of the nation, confronting and con-
fronted by a proletariate, with only a rather small and not very
active middle class intervening between them. The prole-
tariate, however, was in part amenable to the nobility, being
composed of persons who were its Clients ; and it was not dif-
ficult to keep the remaining members in good-humor by be-
stowing upon them from time to time allotments of land in the
conquered territories. On the whole, it may be said that the
proletariate was, during this period, at the beck and call of the
nobles, while the only opposition which caused them anxiety
was that of the middle class — Italian farmers principally — who,
supported by some of the less distinguished Plebeian " houses,"
formed an " opposition," which was sometimes formidable.

It was the object of the nobles to increase the power of the
Senate as compared with the " comitia ; " and to bring the
" comitia " themselves under aristocratic influence. The ex-
altation of the Senate was effected very gradually. The more
important foreign affairs became — and everything was foreign
out of Italy — the greater grew to be the power of the Senate,
which settled all such matters without reference to the " co-
mitia." And, with respect to home affairs, the more widely
the franchise was extended (and it reached through the Roman

35© RAWLINSON

colonies to very remote parts of Italy), the more numerous and
varied the elements that were admitted to it, the less were the
" comitia " possessed of any distinct and positive will, and the
more easy did it become to manipulate and manage them. As
a rule, the people stood and assented to all proposals made by
the magistrates. They were too widely scattered over the ter-
ritory to be instructed beforehand, too numerous to be ad-
dressed eflfectively at the time of voting — besides which, no one
but the presiding magistrate had the right of addressing them.

To bring the " comitia " more completely under the hands
of the government, the vast bodies of freedmen, who consti-
tuted at this time the chief portion of the retainers (clicntes) of
each noble house, were continually admitted to the franchise,
either by a positive enactment, as in B.C. 240, or by the care-
lessness or collusion of the censors, who every five years made
out anew the roll of the citizens. The lower classes of the in-
dependent voters were also systematically corrupted by the
practice of largesses, especially distributions of corn, and by
the exhibition of games at the private cost of the magistrates,
who curried favor with the voters by the splendor and expense
of their shows. It was also, perhaps, to increase the influence
of the nobles over the centuries that the change was made by
which each of the five classes was assigned an equal number
of votes ; for the wealthier citizens not within the noble class
were at this time the most independent and the most likely to
thwart the will of the government.

Still, no hard-and-fast line was drawn between the nobles
and the rest of the community, no barrier which could not be
overstepped. A family became noble through its members ob-
taining any of the high offices of the State, and through its thus
having " images of ancestors " to show. And legally the high-
est office was open to every citizen. Practically, however, the
chief offices came to be confined almost to a clique. This was
owing, in the first place, to the absolute need of great wealth
for certain offices, as especially the aedileship, and to the law
(passed in B.C. 180) by which a regular rotation of offices was
fixed, and no one could reach the higher till he had first served
the lower. But, beyond this, it is evident that after a time a
thoroughly exclusive spirit grew up ; and all the influence of the

ANCIENT HISTORY 351

nobles over the " comitia " was exerted to keep out of high
office every " new man "—every one, that is, who did not be^
long to the narrow list of some forty or fifty " houses " who
considered it their right to rule the commonwealth.

The attempts of the " opposition " were limited to two kinds
of efforts. First, they vainly wasted their strength in noble
but futile efforts to check the spread of luxury and corruption,
including however under those harsh names much that modem
society would regard as proper civilization and refinement.
Secondly, they now and then succeeded by determined exer-
tions in raising to high office a " new man " — a Porcius Cato,
or a C. Flaminius — who was a thorn in the side of the nobles
during the remainder of his lifetime, but rarely effected any
political change of importance. Altogether, the " opposition "
seems fairly taxable with narrow views and an inability to g^p-
ple with the difficulties of the situation. The age was one of
" political mediocrities." Intent on pursuing their career of
conquest abroad, the Roman people cared little and thought
little of affairs at home. The State drifted into difficulties,
which were unperceived and unsuspected, till they suddenly
declared themselves with startling violence at the epoch where-
at we have now arrived.

FIFTH PERIOD.

From the Commencement of internal Troubles under the
Gracchi to the Establishment of the Empire under Au-
gustus, B.C. 133 to A.D. 30.*

An epoch is now reached at which the foreign wars of Rome
become few and unimportant, while the internal affairs of the
State have once more a grave and absorbing interest. Civil

♦ Sources. The continuous histories of this period, composed by
ancient writers, whether Greek or Latin, if we except mere sketches and
epitomes, are all lost. For the earlier portion of it — B.C. 133 to 70— our
materials are especially scanty. Plutarch, in his " Lives " of the Gracchi,
of Marius, Sylla, Lucullus, Crassus, and Sertorius, and Appian,
" De Bellis Civilibus," are the chief authorities; to which may be added
Sallust's " Jug^urtha," a brilliant and valuable monograph, together
with a few fragments of his " Histories." In this comparative scarcity

352 RAWLINSON

troubles and commotions follow one another with great rapid-
ity ; and finally we come to a period when the arms of the Ro-
mans are turned against themselves, and the conquerors of the
world engage in civil wars of extraordinary violence. The
origin of these disturbances is to be found in the gulf which had
been gradually forming and widening between the poor and the
rich, the nobles and the proletariate. For a long series of
years, from the termination of the Second Samnite War to the
final settlement of Northern Italy (B.C. 303 to 177), the press-
ure of poverty had been continually kept down and alleviated,
partly by the long and bloody struggles which decimated the
population and so relieved the labor-market, partly by distri-
butions of plunder, and, above all, by assignations of lands.
But the last Italian colony was sent out in B.C. 177 ; and a new
generation had now grown up which had neither received nor
expected any such relief. The lands of Italy were all occu-
pied ; no nation within its borders remained to be conquered ;
and settlements beyond the seas possessed for the ordinary Ro-
man citizen few attractions. As the wars came to be less con-
stant and less sanguinary, the population increased rapidly, and
no vent was provided for the newcomers. The labor-market
was overcrowded ; it became difficult for a poor man to obtain
a living; and those dangers arose which such a condition of
things is sure to bring upon a State.

The state of affairs would have been very different had the
Licinian law with respect to the employment of free labor been
enforced against the occupiers of the public domain. This do-

of sources, even the brief compendium of the prejudiced Paterculus,
and the " Epitomes " of the careless and inaccurate Livy, come to have
an importance. From about B.C. 70, there is an improvement both in
the amount and in the character of the extant materials. Appian con-
tinues to be of service, as also does Plutarch in his " Lives " of Cicero,
Pompey, Julius Caesar, Cato the younger, Brutus, and Antonius;
while we obtain, in addition, abundant information of the most au-
thentic kind, first, from the contemporary " Speeches " and " Letters "
of Cicero, and then from the " Commentaries " of Caesar and Hirtius.
The continuous narrative of Dio Cassius begins also from the year B.C.
69; the " Catiline " of Sallust belongs to the years B.C. 66 to 62; and
Suetonius's " Lives " of Julius and Octavius fall, the one entirely, the
other partially, within the date which terminates the period.

ANCIENT HISTORY 353

main, which had now become extremely large, had, naturally
enough, been occupied by the capitalist (which was nearly
identical with the governing) class, who had at the time seemed
to compensate fairly the non-capitahsts by extremely liberal
allotments of small plots of ground in absolute property. But,
wliile the poorer classes increased in number, the richer were
stationary, or even dwindled. Old " houses " became extinct,
while new " houses " only vnth great difficulty pushed them-
selves into the ruling order. There were no means of obtain-
ing much wealth at Rome except by the occupation of domain
lands on a large scale, by the farming of the revenue, or by the
government of the produces. But these sources of wealth
were, all of them, at the disposal of the ruling class, who as-
signed them, almost without exception, to members of their
own families. Thus the wealthy were continually becoming
more wealthy, while the i>c>or grew poorer. There was no ap-
preciable introduction of new blood into the ranks of the aris-
tocracy. The domain land was in B.C. 133 engrossed by the
members of some forty or fifty Roman " houses " and by a cer-
tain number of rich Italians, of whom the former had gjown
to be enormously wealthy by inheritance, intermarriages, and
the monopoly of government employments. The " modus
agjorum " established by Licinius had fallen into oblivion, or
at least into disuse ; and several thousand ** jugera " were prob-
ably often held by a single man. Still, in all this there would
have been no very g^eat hardship, had the domain land been cul-
tivated by the free labor of Roman citizens, either wholly or in
any decent proportion. In that case, the noble " possessor "
must have conveyed to his estate, in whatever part of Italy it
was situated, a body of poor Roman freemen, who would have
formed a sort of colony upon his land, and would have only
differed from other colonists in working for wages instead of
cultivating on their own account. The Roman labor-market
would have been relieved, and no danger would have threat-
ened the State from its lower orders. But it seemed to the
" possessor " more economical and more convenient to culti-
vate his land by means of slaves, which the numerous wars of
the times, together with the regular slave-trade, had made
cheap. The Licinian enactment was therefore very early set
a3

354

RAWLINSON

at naught; and it was not enforced. Everywhere over Italy
the pubHc domain was cultivated by gangs of slaves.

Among the more wise and patriotic of the Romans it had
long been seen that this state of things was fraught with peril.
At Rome a proletariate daily becoming poorer and more un-
wieldy, content hitherto to be at the beck and call of the nobles,
but if it once grew to be hungry and hopeless, then most dan-
gerous— in Italy a vast slave population, composed largely of
those who had known liberty and were not deficient in intelli-
gence, harshly treated and without any attachment to its mas- i
ters, which might be expected on any favorable opportunity to
rise and fight desperately for freedom — the government, if an
outbreak occurred, dependent on the swords of the soldiers,
who might largely sympathize with the poorer classes, from
which they were in great measure taken — such a combination
boded ill for peace, and claimed the serious consideration of all
who pretended to the name of statesmen. Unhappily, at Rome,
statesmen were " few and far between ; " yet, about B.C. 140,
Laelius (the friend of Scipio) had recognized the peril of the
situation, and had proposed some fresh agrarian enactments as
a remedy, but had been frightened from his purpose by the
opposition which the nobles threatened. Matters went on in
the old groove till B.C. 133, when at length a tribune of the
Plebs, Ti. Sempronius Gracchus by name, a member of one of
the noblest Plebeian houses, came forward with a set of prop-
ositions which had for their object the relief of the existing
distress among the Roman citizens, and the improvement of
the general condition of Italy by the substitution of free cultiva-
tors of the small yeoman class for the gangs of disaffected slaves
who were now spread over the country. The exact measures
which he proposed were, (i) The revival of the obsolete law of
Licinius, fixing the amount of domain land which a man might
legally occupy at 500 jugera, with the modification that he
might hold also 250 jugera for each of his unemancipated adult
sons ; (2) The appointment of a standing commission of three
members to enforce the law ; (3) The division among the poorer
citizens of the State lands which would by the operation of the
first provision become vacant; (4) The compensation of the
possessores on account of their losses from improvements made

ANCIENT HISTORY 355

on the lands which they reHnquished by the assignment to them
of the portions of land which they legally retained in absolute
ownership ; and (5) The proviso that the new allotments, when
once made, should be inalienable.

The propositions of Gracchus were intensely disagreeable to
the bulk of the nobility and to a certain number of the richer
Italians, who had, legally or illegally, become occupiers of the
domain to an extent beyond that which it was proposed to
establish as the limit. Naturally therefore his laws were op-
posed. The opposition was led by one of his own colleagues,
the tribune Octavius, who by his veto prevented the vote of the
tribes from being taken. An unseemly contention followed,
which Gracchus, unfortunately for himself and for his cause,
terminated by proposing to the tribes, and carrying, the deposi-
tion of his adversary. The laws were then passed, a commis-
sion was appointed (Gracchus, his brother Caius, and Ap.
Claudius, his father-in-law), and the work of resumption and
distribution commenced.

But it was more easy to initiate than to carry out a measure
of such extent and complication, and one that aroused such
fierce passions, as that which the bold tribune had taken in
hand. As he advanced in his work his popularity waned. His
adversaries took heart ; and, to secure himself and his cause,
he was forced to propose fresh laws of a more and more revo-
lutionary character. The propositions which he made, and his
conduct in endeavoring to secure his re-election, for the pur-
pose of carrying them, goaded his enemies to fury; and the
Senate itself, with Scipio Nasica at its head, took the lead in a
violent attack upon him as he presided in the Tribes, and mur-
dered him in open day together with 300 of his partisans.

The open murder of a tribune of the Plebs engaged in the
duties of his office was an unprecedented act in Roman history
(for the assassination of Genucius, B.C. 471, had been secret),
and sufficiently indicated the arrival of a new period, when the
old respect for law and order would no longer hold its ground,
and the State would become a prey to the violent and the un-
scrupulous. For the moment, however, the evil deed done re-
coiled upon its authors. Nasica, denounced as a murderer on
all hands, though unprosecuted, was forced to quit Italy and

356 RAWLINSON

go into banishment. The Agrarian Commission of Gracchus
was renewed, and allowed to continue its labors. Moderation
on the part of the democratic leaders who had succeeded to the
position of Gracchus would have secured important results for
the poor from the martyrdom of their champion ; but the ar-
bitrary conduct of the new commissioners, Carbo and Flaccus,
disgusted the moderate party at Rome and large numbers of
the Italians; the Senate found itself strong enough to quash
the Commission and assign the execution of the Sempronian
Law to the ordinary executive, the consuls ; and finally, when,
by the assassination of the younger Africanus, the democrats
had put themselves decidedly in the wrong, it was able to go a
step farther, and suspend proceedings under the law altogether.

A lull in the storm now occurred — a period of comparative
tranquillity, during which only a few mutterings were heard,
indications to the wise that all was not over. A claim to the
franchise began to be urged by the Latins and Italians, and to
find advocates among the democratic Romans, who thought
that in the accession of these fresh members to the tribes they
saw a means of more effectually controlling the Senate. Q.
Fabius Flaccus, the consul of B.C. 125, formulated these claims
into a law ; but the Senate contrived to tide over the difficulty
by sending him upon foreign service. The revolt of the dis-
appointed Fregellae followed ; and the bloody vengeance taken
on the unhappy town frightened the Italians, for the time at
any rate, into silence. Meanwhile, the younger Gracchus, who
had gone as quaestor into Sardinia, B.C. 126, was detained there
by the Senate's orders till B.C. 124, when he suddenly returned
to Rome and announced himself as a candidate for the trib-
unate.

The measures of C. Gracchus were more varied and more
sweeping than those of his elder brother ; but they were cast in
the same mould. He had the same two objects in view — the
relief of the poorer classes, and the depression of the power of
the Senate. Like his brother, he fell a victim to his exertions
in the popular cause ; but he effected more. His elevation of
the Equestrian Order, and his system of corn-largesses — ^the
" Roman poor-law," as it has been called — survived him, and
became permanent parts of the constitution. To him is also

ANCIENT HISTORY 357

attributable the extension of the Roman colonial system into
the provinces. He was a great and good man ; but he had a
difficult part to play ; and he was wanting in the tact and dis-
cretion which the circumstances of the times required. The
Senate, being far more than his match in finesse and manoeuvre,
triumphed over him, though not without once more having re-
course to violence, and staining the streets and prisons of Rome
with the blood of above 3000 of her citizens.

The death of C. Gracchus was followed within a short space
by the practical repeal of his Agrarian law. First the proviso
that the allotments made under it should be inalienable was
abrogated, so that the rich might recover them through mort-
gage or purchase. Then a law was passed forbidding any
further allotments (" Lex Boria "), and imposing a quit-rent
on all " possessores," the whole amount of which was to be
annually distributed among the poorer classes of the people.
Finally, by the " Lex Thoria," the quit-rents were abolished,
and the domain land in the hands of the " possessores " was
made over to them absolutely.

The twenty years from B.C. 120 to 100 formed a time of
comparative internal tranquillity. Rome during this period
was under the government of the aristocratical party, which
directed her policy and filled up most of the high offices. But
the party was during the whole period losing ground. The
corruption of the upper classes was gradually increasing, and
— what was worse for their interests — was becoming more
generally known. The circumstances of the Jugurthine War
brought it prominently into notice. At the same time the
democratic party was learning its strength. It found itself
able by vigorous efforts to carry its candidates and its measures
in the Tribes. It learnt to use the weapons which had proved
so effectual in the hands of the nobles — violence and armed
tumult — against them. And, towards the close of the period,
it obtained . leaders as bold and ruthless as those who in the
time of the Gracchi had secured the victory for the opposite
faction.

While internally Rome remained in tolerable tranquillity,
externally she was engaged in several most important and even
dangerous wars. The year of the death of C. Gracchus, B.C.

358 RAWLINSON

121, saw the conquest of Southern Gaul effected by the victories
of Domitius and Fabius, and the formation of that new " Prov-
ince " whereto the title has ever since adhered as a proper name
(Provence). Three years later, B.C. ii8, the troubles began
in Africa which led to the Jugurthine War. That war was
chiefly important for the revelation which it made of Roman
aristocratic corruption, and for the fact that it first brought
prominently into notice the two great party-leaders, Marius
and Sulla. Scarcely was it ended when a real danger threat-
ened Rome from the barbarians of the North, a danger from
which Marius, the best general of the time, with difficulty saved
her.

Before the war with Jugurtha was over, that with the North-
ern barbarians had begun. The Cimbri and Teutones — Celts
probably and Germans — issuing, as it would seem, from the
tract beyond the Rhine and Danube, appeared suddenly in vast
numbers in the region between those streams and the Alps,
ravaging it at their will, and from time to time threatening, and
even crossing, the Roman frontier, and inflicting losses upon
the Roman armies. The natives of the region especially subject
to their ravages, in great part, joined them, especially the Am-
brones, Tigurini, and Tectosages. As early as B.C. 113 a
horde of Cimbri crossed the Alps and defeated the consul Cn.
Papirius Carbo, in Istria. In B.C. 109, Cimbri appeared on
the borders of Roman Gaul (Provence) and demanded lands.
Opposed by the consul M. Junius Silanus, they attacked and
defeated him ; and from this time till B.C. loi the war raged
almost continuously, Marius finally bringing it to a close by
his victory near Vercellse in that year.

The victories of Aquae Sextiae and Vercellse raised Marius
to a dangerous eminence. Never, since the first establishment
of the Republic, had a single citizen so far outshone all rivals.
Had Marius possessed real statesmanship, he might have an-
ticipated the work of Julius, and have imposed himself on the
State as its permanent head. But, though sufficiently ambi-
tious, he wanted judgment and firmness. He had no clear and
definite views, either of the exact position to which he aspired,
or of the means whereby he was to attain to it. His course
was marked by hesitation and indecision. Endeavoring to

ANCIENT HISTORY 359

please all parties, he pleased none. At first allying himself
with Glaucia and Saturninus, he gave his sanction to the long
series of measures by which the latter — the first thorough Ro-
man demagogue — sought to secure the favor of the lower or-
ders. He encouraged the persecution of Metellus, and gladly
saw him driven into exile, thus deeply offending the senatorial
party. But when the violence and recklessness of his allies had
provoked an armed resistance and civil disturbances began,
he shrank from boldly casting in his lot with the innovators,
and, while attempting to screen, in fact sacrificed, his friends.
The fall of Saturninus was followed, B.C. 99, by the recall
of Metellus from banishment, and the voluntary exile of the
haughty and now generally unpopular Marius. That great
general but poor statesman retired to Asia and visited the
court of Mithridates. The triumph of his rival, though stained
by the murder of another tribune, seemed for a time to have
given peace to Rome ; but the period of tranquillity was not
of long duration. In B.C. 91, M. Livius Drusus, the son of the
Drusus who had opposed C. Gracchus, brought forward a set
of measures which had for their object the reconcilement, at
Rome, of the Senatorian with the Equestrian Order, and, in
Italy, of the claims of the Italians with those of the old citizens
of Rome. There had now been for thirty years a struggle at
Rome between the nobles and the bourgeoisie on the ques-
tion of which of the two should furnish the judices; ex-
pectations had been also for about the same space of time
held out to the Italians generally that they would be accepted
into full citizenship. It was venturesome in Drusus to address
himself at one and the same time to both these great questions.
Successfully to gfrapple with them a man was required of first-
rate powers, one who could bend opposing classes to his will,
and compel or induce them to accept, however reluctantly, the
compromise which he considered just or expedient. Drusus
seems to have possessed mere good intentions, combined with
average ability. He carried his " lex de judiciis," but was un-
able to pass that extending the franchise. Once more the
Roman conservatives had recourse to assassination, and de-
layed a necessary reform by a bold use of the knife. Drusus
was murdered before his year of office was out ; and the laws

36o RAWLINSON

which he had passed were declared null and void by the gov-
ernment.

The murder of Drusus drove the Italians to despair. Ac-
customed for many years to form an important element in the
Roman armies, and long buoyed up with hopes of obtaining
the advantages of citizenship — the chief oi which were lands,
cheap corn, and the covert bribery of largesses — the tribes of
Central and Southern Italy, finding their champion murdered
and their hopes dashed to the ground, flew to arms. Eight
nations, chiefly of the Sabine stock, entered into close alliance,
chose Corfinium in the Pelignian Apennines for their capital,
and formed a federal republic, to which they gave the name of
" Italia." At the outset, great success attended the effort ; and
it seemed as if Rome must have succumbed. Lucius Caesar,
one of the consuls, Perperna, one of his legates, and Postumius,
the praetor, were defeated. The allies overran Campania, de-
stroyed a consular army under Csepio, and entered into nego-
tiations with the northern Italians, whose fidelity now wav-
ered. But the sagacious policy of Rome changed the face of
affairs, and secured her a triumph which she could not have
accomplished by arms alone. The " Julian Law " conferred
full citizenship both on such of the Italians as had taken no
part in the war hitherto, the Etruscans, Umbrians, Sabines
proper, Hernicans, etc., and also on all such as upon the pas-
sage of the law ceased to take part in it. By this proviso the
revolt became disorganized ; a " peace party " was formed in
the. ranks of the allies; nation after nation fell away from the
league ; Rome gained successes in the field ; and at last, when
only Samnium and Lucania remained in arms, the policy of
concession was once more adroitly used, and the " Lex Plotia,"
which granted all that the allies had ever claimed, put an end
to the war.

The part taken by Marius in the Social War had redounded
little to his credit. He had served as legate to the consul
Rutilius, in the first disastrous year, and had declined battle
when Pompaedius offered it. Probably his sympathies were
with the revolters, and he had no desire to push them to ex-
tremities. Sulla, on the other hand, had greatly increased his
reputation by his campaigns of B.C. 89 and 88; and it was

ANCIENT HISTORY 361

therefore natural that he should be selected by the Senate
as the commander who was to undertake the war against
Mithridates, which needed a first-rate general. But this se-
lection deeply offended Marius, who had long regarded the
conduct of that struggle as his due. Determined to displace
his rival, or perhaps actuated by a less selfish motive, he
suddenly undertook the open championship of the Italians,
whose forced admission to the franchise the government was
attempting to make a mockery by confining them, despite
their large numbers, to some eight or ten tribes. At his in-
stigation, the tribune Sulpicius proposed and, by means of
tumult, carried a law distributing the new voters through all
the tribes, and thus giving them the complete control of the
Comitia. At the same time, he enrolled in the tribes a large
number of freedmen. Comitia thus formed passed, as a matter
of course, an enactment depriving Sulla of his post, and trans-
ferring the command to Marius, B.C. 88.

The insulted consul was not prepared to submit to his ad-
versary. Quitting Rome, he made an appeal to his legions,
and finding them ready to back his claims, he marched straight
upon the capital. The step seems to have been a complete sur-
prise to Marius, who had taken no precautions to meet it. In
vain did the Roman people seek to defend their city from the
hostile entrance of Roman troops under a Roman general. A
threat of applying the torch to their houses quelled them. In
vain Marius, collecting such forces as he could find, withstood
his rival in the streets and at first repulsed him. The hasty
levies which alone he had been able to raise were no match for
the legionaries. The victory remained with Sulla; and the
defeated Marians were forced to seek safety in flight. Through
a wonderful series of adventures, the late director of affairs
at Rome, with his son, reached Africa an almost unattended
fugitive.

Meantime, at Rome, the consul, confident in his armed
strength, proscribed his adversaries, repealed the Sulpician
laws, put Sulpicius himself to death, and passed various meas-
ures favorable to the nobility. But he could not remain per-
manently at the capital. The affairs of the East called him
away ; and no sooner was he gone than the flames of civil war

362 RAWLINSON

burst out afresh. Cinna, raised to the consulate by the popular
party, endeavored to restore the exiled Marius and to re-enact
the laws of Sulpicius. But the aristocrats took arms. Cinna,
forced to fly, threw himself, like Sulla, upon the legionaries,
and having obtained their support, and also that of the Italians
generally, while at the same time he invited Marius over from
Africa, marched on Rome with his partisans. Again the city
was taken, and this time was treated like one conquered from
an enemy. The friends of Sulla were butchered ; the houses
of the rich plundered ; and the honor of noble families put at
the mercy of slaves. Prosecutions of those who had escaped
the massacre followed. Sulla was proscribed, and a reign of
terror was inaugurated which lasted for several months. But
the death of Marius, early in B.C. 86, put a stop to the worst
of these horrors, though Rome remained for two years longer
under a species of dictatorship, constitutional forms being sus-
pended.

Meanwhile, in the East, Sulla had been victorious over Mith-
ridates, had recovered Greece, Macedonia, and Asia Minor,
crushed Fimbria, the Marian partisan, who sought to deprive
him of his laurels, collected vast sums of money, and, above all,
brought a large Roman army to feel that devotion to his person
which is easily inspired in soldiers by a successful general. It
is creditable to Sulla that he at no moment allowed his private
quarrels to interfere with the public interests, but postponed
the rectification of his own wrongs until he had taken ample
vengeance for those of his country. The peace of Dardanus
was in the highest degree honorable to Rome and humiliating
to Mithridates, who not only abandoned all his conquests, but
consented to a fine of 2000 talents and surrendered his fleet.
Having accomplished in five campaigns, conducted mainly
from his private resources, all the objects of the war, Sulla
could with propriety address himself to the settlement of his
quarrel with the Marians, and having put down Fimbria in
Asia, could make his arrangements for fighting out the civil
struggle, which had long been inevitable, in Italy and at Rome
itself.

The determination of Sulla to return to Italy at the head of
his army, and measure his strength against that of the Mar-

ANCIENT HISTORY 363

ians, had been apparent from the moment when he declined
to yield his command to Valerius Flaccus, B.C. 86. The gage
of battle had in fact been thrown down to him by his adver-
saries, when they declared him a public enemy, and he would
have been more than human if he had not accepted it. He
knew that the party of the nobles, whereof he was the repre-
sentative, was still strong at Rome, and he felt that he could
count on the army which he had now so often led to victory.
The death of Marius had made him beyond dispute the first of
living generals. There was none among the leaders of the
opposite faction for whom he could feel much respect, unless
it were the self-restrained and far from popular Sertorius.
The strength of his adversaries lay in the Roman mob and
in the Italians. For the former he had all a soldier's contempt ;
but the latter he knew to be formidable. He therefore, with
adroit policy, prefaced his return by a declaration that he " in-
tended no interference with the rights of any citizen, new or
old." The Italians accepted the pledge, and stood neutral
during the opening scenes of the contest.

The triumph of Sulla and the nobles was stained by a mur-
derous cruelty such as Rome had never yet witnessed. Not
only were the leaders of the late war, and every relation of
Marius that could be found, put to death, but at Rome the
wealthy bourgeoisie, and in the provinces the disaffected
Italians, were slaughtered by thousands. The fatal " lists " of
the " proscribed " began ; and numbers of wholly innocent per-
sons were executed merely on account of their wealth. Nearly
3000 are said to have perished at Rome, 12,000 at Praeneste,
and numbers not much smaller at other Italian cities which
had favored the Marians. The property of every victim was
confiscated. Sulla remained lord of Rome, first with no title,
then as " dictator," for the space of nearly three years, when he
astonished the world by a voluntary abdication of power, a
retirement to Puteoli, and a dedication of the remainder of his
life to amusement and sensual pleasures. First, however, by
his dictatorial power he entirely reformed the Roman Consti-
tution, depriving it of all elements of a popular character, and
concentrating all power in the hands of the Senate.

It was not to be expected that the violent changes introduced

364 RAWLINSON

by Sulla into the Roman constitution could long remain un-
modified. The popular party might be paralyzed by terror for
a time ; but it was sure to revive. The excesses of the nob